* 

OF  THE 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


'I 
*/ 

" 


i 


-* 


GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 


GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 


A  PRAGMATIC  STUDY  OF  THEOLOGY 


BY 

FRANCIS  HOWE  JOHNSON 

«         1* 
AUTHOR  OF   WHAT  IS  REALITY  ? 


Amid  all  that  is  problematic  this  at  least  is  certain:  —  Our  life 
is  no  empty  surface-dallying.  Something  momentously  significant 
is  going  forward  in  it,  a  movement  with  which  we  ourselves  have 
much  to  do,  the  direction  of  which  we  are  quite  well  able  to 
gauge.  —  RUDOLF  EUCKEN 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  AND    CO. 

FOURTH  AVENUE  &  30TH  STREET,  NEW  YORK 
LONDON,  BOMBAY,  AND  CALCUTTA 

1911 


COPYRIGHT,    1911,    BY 
LONGMANS,    GREEN,    AND    CO, 


THE • PLIMPTON • PRESS 

I  W  • D • O] 
NORWOOD  •  MASS  •  U  •  S  •  A 


PREFACE 

THE  argument  to  which  attention  is  called 
in  the  following  pages  is  intimately  related 
to  that  of  a  book  written  some  twenty 
years  ago,  entitled  "What  is  Reality?"1  parts  of 
two  chapters  of  which  are  brought  together  and 
re-stated  in  Appendix  A  of  this  book. 

On  some  accounts  the  interval  that  separates 
the  two  is  infelicitous.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
it  is  an  advantage;  for  a  fundamental  principle 
of  the  method  herein  advocated  is,  that  the 
value  of  any  theory  can  be  demonstrated  only  by 
the  test  of  experience.  And,  at  the  end  of  two 
decades  of  scientific  and  philosophical  activity, 
it  is  encouraging  to  find  that  the  stream  of 
thought  on  which  the  earlier  venture  was  launched 
has  swollen  into  a  great  river,  carrying  philos- 
ophies of  high  import. 

The  answer  then  given  to  the  question  — 
"What  is  Reality?"  has  found  substantial  en- 
dorsement in  the  pragmatic  method  of  James 
and  Schiller  and  Dewey,  and  in  the  trend  of 
a  wide-spread  movement  of  scattered  thought 

1  Houghton,  Mifflin  and  Co.,  1891,  Boston  and  New  York, 
pp.  xxvii  +  510. 

v 

236428 


vi  PREFACE 

that  is  thoroughly,  though  often  unconsciously, 
pragmatistic. 

In  other  words,  the  foundations,  laid  twenty 
years  ago,  having  solidified  rather  than  crumbled, 
a  strong  inducement  is  offered  to  attempt  a  more 
specific  application  of  this  method  to  theology. 
And,  if  a  renewed  appeal  to  the  actualities  of  ex- 
perience shall  be  found  to  yield  some  intelligible 
answers  in  this  department,  it  will  surely  not 
be  a  matter  of  "carrying  coals  to  Newcastle." 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

THE  SITUATION 1 

CONCERNING  METHOD 18 

GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION 37 

THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION  ....  60 

THE  OMNIPOTENCE  OF  GOD 84 

EVOLUTION  AND  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  GOD'S  BENEVOLENCE  102 

THE  MANDATE  OF  EVOLUTION 135 

WORK  OUT  YOUR  OWN  SALVATION 154 

THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION 173 

ANALOGY  FROM  THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM     .      .      .     .  190 

THE  GREAT  IDEAL 212 

Two  FORMULAS 233 

EXPERIENCE  AND  WILL 259 

LIFE'S  LESSER  ENTHUSIASMS 278 

THE  WILL  TO  LOVE 296 

APPENDIX  A.     THE  EVIDENTIAL  VALUE  OF  ANALOGY  311 

APPENDIX  B.     HENRY  BERGSON    ,  341 


vii 


GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 


CHAPTER  I 

THE   SITUATION 


"'HEOLOGY  has  been,  and  must  con- 
tinue to  be,  implicated  in  the  move- 
ments that,  take  place  in  the  cognate 
departments  of  science  and  philosophy.  The 
three  interpenetrate  each  other,  and  a  living 
theology  is  at  all  times  sensitive  to  changes  of 
attitude  in  the  other  two.  Not  that  it  is  derived 
from  either,  or  both  of  them,  or  that  it  is,  at 
any  time,  vitally  dependent  upon  them.  It 
grows  out  of  and  is  rooted  in  the  real  experi- 
ences of  men  in  their  spiritual  relations.  It  will 
continue  to  live  and  energize  in  the  world  even 
though  science  and  philosophy  should  be  arrayed 
against  it. 

But  it  is  needless  to  say  that  under  such  cir- 
cumstances it  would  be  at  a  disadvantage.  It 
would  not  exert  its  legitimate  influence.  The 
situation  would  be  abnormal.  The  three  should 
march  together,  be  mutually  supporting,  restrain- 
ing, inspiring.  And  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  it  is 
toward  such  a  condition  of  things  that  the  ever- 
turning  wheels  of  evolution  are  carrying  us. 

l 


$'•»/'  GOD  '-IN   EVOLUTION 

Through  our  antagonisms,  and  even  by  means  of 
them,  we  are  fighting  our  way  to  a  better  under- 
standing. Each  department,  by  loyalty  to  its 
own  aspect  of  the  truth,  has  helped  to  work  out 
the  one  great  problem.  Even  controversy,  which 
at  times  seems  so  barren,  has  helped  to  eliminate 
useless  issues  and  clarify  the  medium  of  thought 
in  which  we  move. 

The  present  outlook  is,  from  some  points  of 
view  at  least,  most  interesting  and  full  of  promise; 
for  in  each  of  the  three  departments  there  is  a 
germinal  movement,  a  new  departure  and,  also 
discernible,  a  common  centre  toward  which  all 
three  converge. 

The  situation  is,  in  important  respects,  like 
that  of  the  early  Christian  centuries,  when  old 
conservative  religions  of  separate  nations  budded 
forth,  each  one  with  a  new  version  of  itself;  and 
old  philosophies  enlarged  and  adapted  themselves 
in  obedience  to  new  aspects  of  truth  that  had 
dawned  upon  the  consciousness  of  the  race.  The 
ancient  Persian  faith  gave  birth  to  Mithraism; 
that  of  Egypt  to  the  cult  of  Isis,  and  the  grand 
old  Hebrew  religion,  to  Christianity;  and,  in  all 
three,  the  new  elements  had  much  in  common. 
So  also  with  the  old  philosophies,  the  new  versions 
moved  toward  one  vaguely-defined  goal,  and  also 
tended  to  assimilation  with  the  new  religions. 

To-day,  in  science,  in  philosophy  and  in  religion 
there  are  similar  vigorous  outgrowths,  embody- 
ing a  new  way  of  looking  at  things.  In  science 


THE    SITUATION  3 

it  is  the  gradual  decay  of  the  mechanical  con- 
ception of  the  world,  and  the  substitution  for  it 
of  a  psychological  interpretation  of  its  phenom- 
ena. In  philosophy  it  is  the  protest  on  the 
part  of  a  considerable  body  of  concrete  thinkers, 
who  employ  in  their  constructions  a  method  that 
deals,  to  use  Professor  John  Dewey's  phrase, 
with  whole,  not  half,  ideas.  Breaking  with  the 
abstractions  and  negations  of  the  past,  this  school 
puts  itself  in  communication  with  actual  experi- 
ence. 

In  religion,  that  is,  in  the  statement  of  it  which 
we  call  theology,  there  is  a  movement,  not  con- 
certed, not  clearly  formulated,  but  with  well- 
defined  convergent  tendencies.  As  in  the  elder 
day,  so  now,  there  is  a  common  motive  underly- 
ing views  that,  to  some  extent,  are  divergent. 
Then,  the  movement  was  away  from  polytheism 
and  toward  some  form  of  monotheism;  now,  it 
is  away  from  the  thought  of  God  as  external  to 
the  universe,  and  toward  some  conception  of 
Him  as  its  living,  in-dwelling  principle. 

Perhaps  I  am  over-sanguine  in  my  forecast  of 
the  outcome  of  these  new  departures  in  science, 
philosophy  and  theology,  but  it  seems  to  me 
written  in  the  very  nature  of  the  great  process 
itself  that  it  must  be  some  harmonizing  synthesis. 

The  little  world  of  the  Ego,  in  which  each  one 
of  us  lives,  has  been  built  up  gradually  by  adding 
concept  to  concept,  and  by  the  successive  correla- 
tion of  these  additions,  in  progressively  larger 


4  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

syntheses.  In  the  course  of  growth,  some  of 
these  additions  have  easily  and  naturally  fitted 
in  to  what  was  previously  organized;  but,  on 
the  other  hand,  many  of  them  have  had  to  pass 
through  much  tribulation  before  they  could  be 
received.  The  highly-organized  personality  that 
every  normally  balanced  adult  has  come  to  be, 
contains  many  elements  that,  originally  hetero- 
geneous and  unassimilable,  have  come  to  be 
correlated  parts  of  a  conscious  personality. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  vastly  complicated 
social  organism;  and  in  its  history  we  can  trace 
the  gradual  amalgamation  of  families  and  tribes 
and  nations,  through  long-drawn-out  antago- 
nisms, into  larger  and  still  larger  organizations. 
And,  in  every  case,  these  transformations  have 
been  brought  about  only  in  part  and  formally 
by  the  coercive  power  of  external  events,  and 
essentially  and  intensively  by  internal  growth 
changes,  —  expansions  of  thought  and  purpose, 
and  wider  outlooks.  Except  for  these  there  would 
have  been  no  real  assimilation,  no  efficient  unity.* 

Over  and  over  again  this  process  has  been 
repeated  on  life's  stage;  and  we  may  as  well 
doubt  the  continued  revolution  of  the  earth 
through  space,  as  to  doubt  the  continuance  of 
the  onward  movement  toward  this  enlargement 
and  correlation  of  thought.  We  may  not  indeed 

*A  most  valuable  exposition  of  this  process  of  mental 
organization  is  given  in  "  Mind  in  Evolution "  by  L.  T. 
Hobhouse,  M.A.,  Chapter  XIII. 


THE   SITUATION  5 

dream  of  a  total  cessation  of  antagonism.  When 
one  set  of  contrarieties  has  been  adjusted,  another 
set,  on  a  wider  field,  emerges.  Were  it  not  so, 
mental  evolution  would  be  arrested. 

But,  for  the  immediate  outlook,  I  think  we 
may  say  that  science,  philosophy  and  theology, 
that  have  for  a  long  time  been  passing  through 
the  phase  of  separation,  and  sometimes  of  antag- 
onism, are  now,  in  the  light  of  wider  concepts, 
drawing  together.  The  lines  of  demarcation 
are  fading  out,  the  larger  view  is  at  hand.  Our 
science  becomes  philosophical  and  our  philosophy 
becomes  scientific;  and  both  lead  up  to,  and 
imply,  theology.  Some  of  the  best  intellects  are 
working  synthetically;  not  confining  themselves 
exclusively  to  the  one  aspect  of  truth  represented 
in  a  department,  but  reaching  out  to  find  the 
truest  expression  of  the  reality  underlying  all. 

This  movement  has  given  us  such  men  as  the 
late  William  James,  and  the  French  philosopher, 
Henri  Bergson.  In  each  separate  department, 
also,  it  has  brought  forth  those  who,  without 
venturing  beyond  their  own  chosen  line  of  work, 
have,  within  that  sphere,  so  reconstructed  its  spec- 
ulative outlooks  as  to  strengthen  the  thought 
that  is  being  worked  out  elsewhere :  —  such  men 
as  the  embryologist,  Hans  Driesch,  who,  beginning 
his  career  with  the  acceptance  of  the  purely  me- 
chanical view  of  organic  development,  was  car- 
ried by  his  studies  to  the  necessity  of  assuming 
an  undefined  influence,  guiding  the  mechanical 


6  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

forces  toward  the  realization  of  ends.  Such  men 
also  as  Reinke,  and  the  physiologist  Bunge,  who 
advocates  seeking  a  knowledge  of  the  creative 
impulse  by  using  what  we  know  of  causation 
in  the  internal  world  of  our  own  consciousness, 
for  the  interpretation  of  that  which  transpires  in 
the  external  world  of  material  organization. 

We  must  not  allow  the  significance  of  this 
movement  to  be  obscured  by  the  names  that  are 
given  to  its  different  developments  with  the  word 
neo  prefixed.  The  labels  "  neo-Lamarckism  "  or 
"neo- vitalism'7  may  serve  a  useful  purpose  as 
indicating  a  certain  relatedness  between  the 
present  and  the  past  of  speculative  thought;  but 
when  these  are  used  to  identify  in  any  measure 
the  old  form  with  the  new,  when  the  new  is  called 
a  " recurrence  to  mediaeval  mysticism,"  or  a 
" pseudo-metaphysical  theory  of  life,"  they  are 
misleading.  Such  a  treatment  of  recurrent  phases 
of  thought  is  not  in  the  interest  of  light-bearing 
but  of  obscuration. 

We  recognize,  as  those  of  an  elder  day  often 
did  not,  that  human  thought  ascends  as  a  spiral, 
and  that  each  new  turn  introduces  hypotheses 
that,  more  or  less,  resemble  phases  of  speculation 
abandoned  on  a  lower  plane.  They  are,  in  some 
respects,  the  same,  but  essentially  different  in 
that,  through  the  removal  of  limitations  in  some 
directions  and  the  positive  enlargement  of  thought 
in  others,  they  are  so  modified  and  reset  as  to  be 
completely  transformed.  The  psychological  ex- 


THE    SITUATION  7 

planations  of  evolution  that  are  today  labelled 
neo-Lamarckism  are  no  more  than  a  reminder  of 
the  hypothesis  of  the  eminent  naturalist  of  a 
century  and  a  half  ago ;  and  the  comparison  of  the 
vitalism  of  to-day  with  that  of  Aristotle  borders 
on  the  grotesque. 

In  the  department  of  theology,  while  there  is 
a  strong  and  sustained  unanimity  of  dissent  from 
certain  phases  of  inherited  belief,  and  while 
there  are,  as  we  have  said,  marked  convergent 
tendencies  in  the  transformation  of  thought,  and 
much  enthusiasm  also  on  the  part  of  individuals 
and  groups  of  individuals  for  newly-apprehended 
aspects  of  the  truth,  there  is,  as  yet,  no  pronounced 
principle  of  solidarity  binding  the  positive  aspects 
of  the  work  together,  nothing  of  that  commanding 
power  that  emanates  from  the  assent  of  a  multi- 
tude, or  even  of  a  select  few  whom  men  have 
learned  to  trust.  At  the  same  time,  there  exists 
a  profound  and  growing  conviction  that  such  a 
solidarity,  such  a  preponderating  weight  of  agree- 
ment, is  not  only  possible  but,  that  it  ought  to 
be  realized.  There  is  no  department  of  life  in 
which  certitude  is  more  ardently,  or  reasonably, 
longed  for.  But,  the  very  growth  process  that 
stimulates  religious  thinking  seems  to  be  the 
natural  and  unavoidable  enemy  of  certitude. 

How  then  is  confidence  to  be  restored  without 
going  back  to  the  policy  of  a  fixed  immovable 
theology?  Can  anything  be  substituted  for  the 


8  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

divine  authority  of  the  church?  Within  the  Ro- 
man church,  the  Modernist  movement  accentu- 
ates this  issue,  though  the  problem  to  be  solved 
is  not  essentially  different  from  that  of  Protes- 
tantism. 

The  difference  in  the  two  situations  is  that  the 
latter,  having  lived  through  three  centuries  of 
denominational  antagonism,  is,  in  some  sort, 
inured  to  its  disabilities,  —  has,  so  to  speak, 
adjusted  itself  to  a  modus  vivendi,  though  deeply 
conscious  of  its  unsatisf actoriness :  while  Mod- 
ernism, viewing  this  same  experience  from  without, 
sees  in  its  outcome  an  object-lesson,  a  terrible 
warning.  Hence  a  dilemma;  the  substance  of 
which  is  stated  by  Father  Tyrrell  in  the  following 
words:  —  " Taught  by  history,  God's  great  logic- 
mill,  which  has  worked  out  both  these  sixteenth 
century  solutions,  the  solution  of  unfettered 
authority  and  the  solution  of  unfettered  liberty 
to  their  impossible  results,  he  (the  modernist), 
will  see  the  necessity  of  going  back  to  the  point 
of  divergence."  * 

The  modernist,  in  other  words,  is  in  search  of 
some  new  way,  that  shall  work  experimentally, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  yield  the  advantages  of 
authority  and  liberty. 

The  possibility  that  naturally  suggests  itself 
is  that  of  combination,  —  the  adoption  of  a 
method  that  shall  associate  the  two  desirable 

*  Passing  Protestantism  and  coming  Catholicism,"  by 
Newman  Smyth,  p.  182. 


THE   SITUATION  9 

elements  in  such  manner  that  neither  shall  over- 
ride the  other,  but  that  each  shall  exercise  a 
restraining  and  supporting  power.  Such  a  method 
ought  to  be  found,  because  all  the  movements 
of  the  world  are  organized  on  a  similar  plan. 
The  great  upward  creative  process  which  we  call 
evolution  is  the  outcome  of  antagonistic  forces 
that  act  and  react  upon  each  other  after  just 
such  a  fashion. 

But  the  achievement  of  such  a  method  is  not 
so  simple  a  matter  as  it  might  at  first  seem,  not 
so  simple  as  it  actually  did  seem  in  the  early 
days  of  the  great  secession  from  Rome.  For 
while  Protestantism  leads  logically  to  what 
Father  Tyrrill  calls  unfettered  liberty,  it  has,  as 
matter  of  fact,  been  striving  all  through  the  years 
to  reach  just  such  a  combination  as  that  contem- 
plated. And  the  great  question  of  to-day  is, 
can  we  go  any  farther  in  this  direction?  Does 
the  experience  of  the  past  encourage  the  hope, 
long  deferred,  that  this  desideratum  will  be 
supplied?  Is  there,  at  the  present  day,  any 
emergence  of  new  elements  that  may  render 
practicable  a  combination  that  has  not  been  a 
success  hitherto,  and  that  is  working  more  and 
more  limpingly  as  time  goes  on? 

The  impression  prevails  in  some  quarters  that 
the  Modernist  movement  may  somehow  bring 
to  Protestantism  a  kind  of  authority,  tempered 
by  liberty,  which  will  prove  the  very  thing  which 
it  long  has  sought,  and  that  the  Christian  church 


10  GOD    IN    EVOLUTION 

as  a  whole  may  thus  realize  a  stable,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  a  living  and  growing  unity. 

To  many  others,  however,  this  hope  seems  to 
lack  foundation,  because  the  kind  of  authority 
thus  provided  differs  in  no  respect  from  that  to 
which  so  long  a  trial  has  been  given:  and  a  radi- 
cally different  way  of  surmounting  the  difficulty  is 
proposed :  —  the  substitution,  that  is,  of  another 
kind  of  authority.  The  gist  of  their  argument 
may,  I  think,  be  stated  somewhat  as  follows. 
The  effort  to  combine  ecclesiastical  authority  and 
liberty  has  failed  to  work,  because  it  is  an  attempt 
to  unite  in  action  two  motives  that  are  not  of  the 
same  order,  two  mutually  irreconcilable  elements. 
Liberty  of  thought  is  a  living,  growing,  aggres- 
sive principle.  Divinely  appointed,  ecclesiasti- 
cal authority  is  a  static,  immovable,  inelastic 
principle;  one  that  does  not  simply  restrain 
liberty,  but  abolishes  it.  It  is  yoking  together 
the  dead  and  the  living.  One,  or  the  other,  of 
these  must,  in  the  long  run,  triumph  and  reign 
supreme.  But,  what  alternative  is  there? 

In  the  April,  1911,  number  of  the  "Hibbert 
Journal"  there  is  an  appeal  from  the  side  of  science 
to  theology  entitled,  "Can  Theology  become 
Scientific?"*  in  which  the  following  questions 
are  put  to  theologians:  —  "Are  they  willing  to 
regard  religious  facts  as  the  primal  realities 
wherewith  they  are  concerned,  and  theological 

*By  M.  M.  Pattison  Muir,  M.A. 


THE    SITUATION  11 

theories  as  instruments  for  acquiring  rationalized 
knowledge  of  these  facts,  not  as  answers  to 
enigmas  in  which  they  can  rest  ?  Are  they 
willing  to  measure  the  truthfulness  of  theological 
ideas  by  their  values  as  aids  to  religious  life,  and 
by  their  relations  to  other  truths  which  also  must 
be  preserved  by  men?  Theologians  speak  of 
theology  as  a  science :  are  they  willing  to  advance 
their  science  by  using  the  scientific  method?" 

After  outlining  what  is  meant  by  the  scientific 
method,  the  same  article  makes  the  following 
hypothetical  forecast. 

"Let  us  suppose,  for  a  moment,  that  theology 
were  to  adopt  and  use  this  method.  Theology 
would  then  be  a  systematic  attempt  to  co-ordinate 
the  facts  of  man's  religious  life;  to  express  the 
points  of  agreement  between  groups  of  these 
facts  by  means  of  general  formulas,  in  other  words 
to  find  the  laws  of  religious  experiences;  to  try 
the  hypotheses  which  have  been  made,  for  the 
purpose  of  bringing  order  into  sections  of  religious 
facts,  by  inquiring  how  these  hypotheses  have 
worked;  to  test  the  truth  of  the  theories  which 
have  claimed,  and  of  those  which  now  claim,  to 
explain  the  facts  of  religious  experience,  by 
inquiring  into  their  fruitfulness,  their  vivifying 
influence,  their  power  of  bringing  the  realities 
with  which  they  are  concerned  into  reconcil- 
ing contact  with  other  truths  of  which  human 
intelligence  demands  the  preservation." 

The  method  here  suggested  is  the  outcome  of 


12  GOD    IN    EVOLUTION 

a  principle  of  far  wider  scope  than  the  realm  of 
physical  science.  It  is  called  scientific,  simply 
because  it  has  been  conspicuously  used  in  the 
practical  part  of  scientific  procedure.  PRAG- 
MATIC is  the  word  that,  in  its  very  modern 
signification,  stands  for  the  larger  transforming 
principle  that  is  bringing  the  antagonistic  aspects 
of  our  thought  together.  I  have  used  the  word 
pragmatic  and  said  nothing  of  pragmatism,  because 
it  seems  to  me  that  the  two  words  may  be  used 
for  effecting  a  very  necessary  discrimination. 

If  the  former  is  used  solely  to  designate  method, 
and  the  latter  solely  a  system  of  philosophy,  that 
has  sprung  up  as  one  application  of  that  method, 
much  confusion  may  be  avoided.  The  method, 
which  has  endless  applications,  is  easily  under- 
stood, and  is  illustrated  so  abundantly  and  clearly 
in  life  that  he  who  runs  may  read.  As  Prof. 
William  James  has  said:  " There  is  absolutely 
nothing  new  in  the  pragmatic  method/'  but 
"not  until  our  own  time  has  it  generalized  itself, 
become  conscious  of  a  universal  mission,  pre- 
tended to  a  conquering  destiny." 

Between  this  method  and  the  derived  system 
of  philosophy  the  same  writer  draws  a  sharp 
line  of  demarcation.  As  a  method,  it  stands  for 
no  special  results,  it  is  rather  an  attitude  of 
orientation.  As  a  system  of  philosophy,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  applied  to  the  working  out  of  a 
"theory  of  truth."  This  latter,  however  ably  it 
may  be  conducted  and  however  useful  it  may,  in 


THE   SITUATION  13 

the  long  run,  prove  to  be,  is  an  entirely  different 
matter:  and  the  failure  to  note  this  difference 
has  given  rise  to  many  damaging  misconceptions 
and  much  unwarrantable  prejudice  against  the 
method.  For,  in  the  development  of  such  a  phil- 
osophy and  in  its  controversial  defence,  many 
words  and  expressions  are  used  that  have  a 
purely  technical  significance,  and  statements  are 
sometimes  made  that,  taken  out  of  their  contro- 
versial setting,  give  the  impression  of  opposing 
the  very  truths  they  are  advocating. 

It  is  with  the  method  alone  that  we  are  con- 
cerned; and  we  shall  hope  to  make  the  nature 
of  its  working  understood,  not  by  definitions,  but 
by  illustrations:  for  a  method  that  deals  with 
concrete  ideas  can  be  best  explained  concretely, 
that  is,  by  the  exhibition  of  its  actual  working. 
It  will,  however,  be  worth  while  to  carry  along 
with  us  and  keep  continually  in  sight  Professor 
Schiller's  Protagorean  formula  —  "MAN  is  THE 
MEASURE*  OF  ALL  THINGS."  It  may  also  be  help- 
ful to  outline  some  of  the  probable  results  of 
its  adoption. 

In  the  first  place,  it  would  necessarily  banish 
to  the  limbo  of  disused  instrumentalities  the 
kind  of  authority  that  has  for  centuries  held 
sway:  —  the  authority,  that  is,  that  takes  its 
stand  on  a  unique,  divine  revelation  granted 
to  a  specially  appointed  group  of  men,  who  act 
as  its  guardians  and  interpreters.  In  the  second 

*The  analogical  and  intensive  measure. 


14  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

place,  it  would  set  up  another  kind  of  authority 
in  the  place  of  that  which  it  deposed :  —  the 
authority  of  human  experience.  Far  from  de- 
livering theology  over  to  unfettered  liberty  it 
would  simply  transfer  all  its  problems  to  another 
tribunal,  —  to  the  tribunal  that  adjudicates  all 
questions  that  arise  in  every  department  of 
science.  In  it  we  have  a  kind  of  authority 
that  can  work  with  liberty,  because  it  is  a  liv- 
ing, growing  and  adjustable  principle,  because  it 
takes  account  of  all  the  new  elements  that  find 
a  place  in  our  ever- widening  experience;  in 
short,  because  it  is  of  the  same  elastic  nature  as 
the  liberty  with  which  it  has  to  co-operate. 

It  is  no  less  strong  for  resistance  because  of  its 
expansiveness.  It  gives,  but  it  does  not  give 
way.  It  yields  and  reconstructs,  but  it  does 
not  break  and  disappear.  In  the  long  run  it  is 
a  far  more  sure  reliance,  and,  in  its  progress, 
irresistible. 

Third,  as  related  to  other  departments  of  con- 
structive thought  the  change  would  be  a  very 
radical  one.  It  would  put  an  end  to  the  remote 
separateness  of  theology,  to  its  superior-cast 
pretentious,  and  bring  it  into  accord  with  the 
community  of  interests  that  jointly  affect  the 
welfare  of  man.  It  would  bring  it  completely 
under  the  influence  of  the  method  that  has 
transformed  and  is  still  transforming  the  outlooks 
of  theoretical  science;  —  a  transformation  that 
makes  it  possible  for  theology  and  science  to 


THE    SITUATION  15 

perfectly  assimilate  their  working  principles  with- 
out the  surrender  of  anything  that  is  vital. 

It  is  into  a  very  real  and  comprehensive  world 
that  this  pragmatic  method  carries  us.  It  calls 
our  attention,  not  to  some  special  phases  of  reality 
alone,  but  to  every  aspect  of  it.  Its  theology 
will  therefore  be  one  that  roots  itself  in  and  grows 
strong  on  every  department  of  human  thought 
and  activity,  that  draws  inspiration  from  every 
kind  of  emotion,  that  turns  its  back  on  nothing, 
despises  nothing.  It  must  be  a  theology  that 
studies  reverently  the  deep  things  of  God,  not 
alone  in  the  utterances  of  seers  through  whom  He 
has  unmistakably  spoken,  not  alone  in  the  con- 
tributions of  science,  but  also  in  the  common 
wisdom  that  has  been  wrought  out  and  com- 
pacted in  the  upward  travail  of  the  race.  As 
Maeterlinck  has  said:  —  "The  thinker  continues 
to  think  justly,  only  when  he  does  not  lose  con- 
tact with  those  who  do  not  think." 

Again,  in  such  a  theology,  the  great  creative 
process  of  the  world  will  be  studied  as  a  sacred 
revelation  of  its  Author.  Humanity,  in  learning 
through  evolution  how  it  has  come  to  be  what 
it  is,  has  entered  upon  a  new  phase  of  self-knowl- 
edge, and  upon  new  outlooks  of  what  lies  before 
it.  But  it  is  not  alone,  or  most  vitally  as  a  matter 
of  knowledge,  that  this  affects  us:  for  knowledge, 
standing  by  itself,  is  little  more  than  material, 
or  instrumentality  to  be  used.  It  is  pre-eminently 


16  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

in  the  power  that  knowledge  generates  that  the 
hope  of  the  future  lies. 

Bergson's  conception  of  the  whole  great  move- 
ment of  creation  as  a  struggle  upward  on  the 
part  of  the  creature,  an  overcoming,  a  triumphing 
over  difficulties,  in  which  every  individual  has 
an  honourable  place,  an  opportunity  of  contribut- 
ing to  the  great  advancing  organization  some- 
thing new  and  precious,  is  a  creative  impulse 
in  itself.  And  James'  proclamation  of  "  THE 
WILL  TO  BELIEVE"  translates  itself  into  the  will 
and  the  power  to  dare  and  to  conquer. 

There  is  no  lack  of  inspiration  in  this  new 
movement.  Like  an  older  evangel,  it  proclaims, 
—  "The  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you."  The 
power  that  works  and  overcomes  through  the 
whole  realm  of  nature,  it  seems  to  say,  works  in 
you  and  with  you.  Eucken  touches  a  profound 
and  most  important  principle  of  life  when  he 
says:  —  "Spiritual  truth  cannot  attract  us  unless 
it  come  before  us  as  our  own  and  not  as  something 
alien  to  us.  In  order  to  make  effective  appeal 
it  must  have  its  roots  in  our  own  nature,  and 
subserve  the  development  of  this  nature."* 

We  are  made  very  familiar  in  these  days  with 
the  word  collapse.  On  this  side  and  on  that, 
we  are  told  that  it  is  taking  place  among  the  old 
structures  that  we  have  inherited  and  also  among 
the  new  that  have  been  hastily  run  up  as  sub- 
stitutes; so  that  we  seem,  at  times,  to  be  living 

*  "  The  Meaning  and  Value  of  Life,"  p.  88. 


THE    SITUATION  17 

in  an  atmosphere  of  demolition,  breathing  lime- 
dust,  and  bewildered  with  the  crash  of  falling 
walls.  But,  it  is  possible  for  most  of  us  to  get 
out  of  this,  leaving  it  to  the  wreckers  whose 
business  it  is,  while  we  escape  to  the  open  places 
of  thought  where  live  things  are  growing. 

But  this  is  anticipating.  Our  present  business 
is  to  test  the  theological  value  of  the  pragmatic 
method,  not  to  praise  it.  A  change  from  the 
old  method  is  not  to  be  lightly  undertaken :  for  it 
is  not  a  surface  adjustment  that  we  are  consider- 
ing. It  goes  indeed  to  the  very  roots  of  things, 
and  our  investigation  of  it  must  be  on  the  lines 
of  experience.  What  does  the  past  testify  as 
to  the  working  in  theology  and  religion  of  the 
established  method?  and  what  measure  of  suc- 
cess, on  the  other  hand,  has  attended  the  working 
of  the  pragmatic  method  in  the  departments  of 
human  activity  to  which  it  has  been  applied? 


CHAPTER  II 

CONCERNING    METHOD 

TO  say  that  Protestantism  is  to-day  labour- 
ing on  through  a  stress  of  great  com- 
plications without  a  method,  might,  in 
view  of  all  the  evidences  of  continuity  and  growth 
that  we  see  about  us,  seem  captious.    But  if  one 
were  to  try  to  define  what  that  method  is,  the 
above   statement  might  not   seem   so   very  far 
amiss. 

I 

As  matter  of  fact,  Protestantism  has,  from  the 
outset  of  its  career,  tried  to  solve  the  problems 
of  religion  by  the  use  of  a  mixed  method  in  which 
two  most  divergent  principles  offset  each  other. 
The  Church  of  Rome  had,  and  still  has,  a  well- 
defined  method  to  which  it  adheres  with  great 
rigidity.  It  hinges  upon  the  assumption  of 
special  and  absolute  divine  sanction.  Its  claim 
is  that  the  knowledge  of  God  and  of  His  relations 
to  men  is  a  matter  confided  to  a  chosen  few,  who 
are  divinely  commissioned  to  communicate  and 
administer  it  to  the  mass  of  mankind  with  abso- 
lute authority.  This  is  an  easily  understood 
method,  strong  in  its  simplicity  and  its  finality. 

18 


CONCERNING  METHOD  19 

It  is  a  method  calculated  to  keep  men  united  and 
to  hold  them  with  a  grip  of  iron  during  periods 
of  intellectual  stagnation. 

But  Protestantism  was  the  child  of  a  great 
intellectual  awakening.  Liberty  of  thought,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  was  its  underlying  motive.  The 
privilege  of  the  individual  to  approach  God  on 
his  own  account  and  to  adjust  the  matters  of  his 
soul  with  Him  at  first  hand  was  the  very  breath 
of  its  existence.  Clearly,  here  was  a  great  gain 
to  the  individual,  a  great  stimulus  to  his  spirit- 
ual and  intellectual  vitality.  But  what  was  to 
become  of  corporate  religion?  Was  there  to  be 
no  church?  no  consensus  of  faith,  no  unity  of  doc- 
trine, no  authority  to  withstand  the  vagaries  of  the 
individual?  The  sacred  writings,  even  if  held  to 
be  verbally  inspired  by  God,  could  not  hold  men 
together  unless  some  authoritative  interpreta- 
tion of  them  were  formulated  to  be  accepted  by  all. 
So,  over  against  liberty  of  thought  and  freedom 
of  access  to  God,  the  system  of  doctrine  that  had 
grown  up  under  the  old  church  was  retained,  with 
the  stamp  of  divine  authority  attached  to  it,  as 
heretofore,  though  somewhat  more  loosely. 

But  at  the  same  time  the  principle  of  liberty 
of  thought,  striking  its  root  deep,  grew  apace 
and  brought  forth  dissension  and  sectarianism. 
Both  methods  were  retained;  not  alone  because 
men  were  habituated  to  them,  but  because  each 
met,  in  its  way,  an  ineradicable  want  of 


20  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

their  nature;  and  they  adjusted  themselves 
now  to  the  one  and  now  to  the  other,  as  cir- 
cumstances dictated.  The  two  principles  were 
the  contradiction  of  each  other;  but  having  been 
once  developed  and  wrought  into  life,  neither 
could  be  dropped.  Corporate  religion  insisted 
on  the  retention  of  the  old  method.  Personal, 
growing  religion  found  the  new  indispensable. 
Wherever  men  thought  and  studied  and  con- 
fronted the  newer  aspects  of  the  world,  the  old 
method  was  summarily  set  aside.  When  the 
guardians  of  the  church  thought  they  saw  it  about 
to  be  torn  asunder  by  the  influx  of  new  and  un- 
assimilable  material,  they  fell  back  on  the  authority 
of  the  past,  hoping  to  stay  the  tide  of  change. 

Under  this  dual  regime  religion  has  lived.  It 
has  to  some  extent  held  men  together,  and  within 
the  church  much  growth  has  been  tolerated  and 
indirectly  encouraged,  but  not,  for  the  most  part, 
officially  endorsed.  But  the  weakness  engen- 
dered by  the  continuance  of  this  state  of  things 
is  most  evident.  Each  of  the  two  principles,  it 
is  true,  has  met  a  religious  want  and,  separately, 
they  have  been  serviceable;  but  their  reactions 
upon  each  other  have  worked  much  mischief. 
The  schisms  created  by  liberty  have  been  intensi- 
fied and  fixed  by  the  principle  of  final  authority; 
for  each  new  form  of  faith  carried  with  it  some- 
thing of  the  claim  to  divine  sanction.  It  is 
unnecessary  to  enlarge  upon  this;  for  wherever 
the  representatives  of  Protestant  communions 


CONCERNING  METHOD  21 

meet  in  conclave,  the  divisions  in  the  church  are 
deplored,  the  wickedness  of  them  is  confessed, 
and  measures  for  overcoming  them  are  discussed. 
But  the  difficulties  in  the  way  continue  to  seem 
insuperable.  And  so  long  as  the  old  method 
continues  to  be  recognized,  they  are  insuperable. 

If  the  particular  tenets  which  divide  the  dif- 
ferent communions  are  each  and  every  one  held 
to  be  parts  of  an  order  definitely  established  by 
God,  essential  constituents  of  "the  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints,"  the  modification  of  them 
would  be  impious.  That  which  bears  the  stamp 
of  a  divine  command  cannot  be  surrendered. 
Each  one  is  willing  and  desirous  that  all  the  others 
should  confess  the  error  of  their  ways  and  become 
reconciled  to  the  one  and  only  true  faith,  which 
is  its  own.  But  each  of  the  others  can  make  but 
one  reply,  "Non  possumus" 

If  the  divisions  in  the  Protestant  Church  are 
ever  to  become  merged  in  a  common  and  united 
faith,  it  must  be  through  the  mediation  of  a 
method  differing  radically  from  institutionalism, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  individualism  on  the  other; 
but  at  the  same  time,  it  must  be  one  that  shall 
meet  in  a  legitimate  way  the  two  above-mentioned 
necessities  of  the  religious  life.  It  must  yield  a 
corporate  faith  that  can  be  always  referred  to  as 
the  support  and  the  rectifier  of  that  of  the  indi- 
vidual, but  which  is  also  open  to  modification 
and  growth.  It  is  the  belief  of  the  writer  that 
the  pragmatic  method  called  in  the  history  of 


22  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

science  the  inductive  method,  can  be  so  applied  to 
theology  as  to  meet  both  these  requirements. 

II 

The  first  thing  we  have  to  say  about  this  method 
is  that  it  is,  in  no  sense,  new.  It  is  not  a  doc- 
trinaire method;  it  is  not  an  impracticable  dream; 
it  is  not  revolutionary;  it  is  a  method  that  has 
long  been  in  satisfactory  use,  has  been  thoroughly 
tested  in  a  great  department  of  constructive 
thought,  has  yielded  results  that  men  could  live 
by  and  around  which  they  could  rally  in  a  united 
support.  It  is  called  the  inductive  method,  not 
because  it  is  opposed  to,  or  exclusive  of,  the  deduc- 
tive, but  because  it  abstains  from  making  deduc- 
tions until,  by  the  collocation  and  classification 
of  facts,  it  has  a  deposit  of  reality  from  which 
to  deduce.  Thus  the  word  inductive  was  used  to 
distinguish  it  from  that  method  which  assumed 
the  grounds  from  which  deductions  were  to  be 
made  by  a  sort  of  right  of  eminent  domain,  em- 
ploying abstractions,  the  fragmentary  products  of 
analytic  thought,  as  if  they  were  the  fundamental 
and  indubitable  realities  of  the  world. 

We  may  say  then  that  the  inductive  method  is 
the  progressive  building  up  of  truth  by  inference 
from,  and  verification  through,  the  actualities  of 
experience.  Its  advocates  claim  no  miraculous 
revelation,  they  take  their  stand  on  no  a  priori 
assumptions.  They  make  the  facts  of  experience 
their  study,  and  they  appeal  to  facts  for  the  en- 


CONCERNING  METHOD  23 

dorsement  of  their  conclusions.  Their  attitude 
toward  all  nature,  physical  and  psychical,  is  one 
of  docility;  their  attitude  toward  men  is  that  of 
persuasion.  To  the  employment  of  this  method 
modern  science  owes  all  its  achievements,  and  only 
by  its  constant  use,  from  the  first  dawnings  of 
human  intelligence,  has  our  great  body  of  common- 
sense  wisdom  come  to  be  what  it  is. 

Our  reasons  for  believing  that  the  faithful  em- 
ployment of  this  method  will  yield  results  as 
satisfactory  in  the  realm  of  religion  as  in  that  of 
physical  science  are,  first,  that  it  has  in  the  past 
produced  such  results.  I  am  not  now  thinking 
of  the  cultivation  of  that  branch  of  our  inherited 
theology  which  is  called  "natural"  and  which, 
under  most  systems  of  formal  theology,  has  had  a 
place  assigned  it.  It  has  not  figured  as  an  im- 
portant factor,  it  has  been  as  a  humble  servant  in 
the  house,  capable  of  throwing  light  on  some  of  the 
details  of  its  management,  but  not  to  be  trusted 
in  its  deeper  counsels.  It  could  hardly  be  other- 
wise, while  the  assumptions  of  orthodoxy  and  the 
facts  of  the  natural  world  remained  hopelessly 
estranged  from  each  other. 

The  satisfactory  results  to  which  I  refer  are 
those  which  to-day  constitute  the  body  of  our 
reliable  assets  in  religious  matters.  For  the  fact 
that  the  vital  elements  of  our  religion  have  come 
down  to  us  through  the  ages  without  loss  we  have 
to  thank  this  very  principle  of  endorsement  and 
conservation  by  experimental  tests.  The  conven- 


24  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

tions  and  institutions  of  men  have  buried  them 
deep,  at  times,  in  extraneous  matter,  have  dressed 
them  up  in  fantastic  clothes,  so  that  they  were 
temporarily  hidden  or  transformed,  but  they  have 
been  powerless  to  change  them  essentially;  the  gold 
has  not  rusted,  the  precious  stones  have  not  had 
their  fire  quenched.  These  imperishable  elemental 
truths  were  first  recognized  as  such  by  the  instinc- 
tive response  of  spirit  to  spirit,  and  they  were 
transmitted  from  one  generation  to  another  by 
the  same  responses.  Human  experience  from  age 
to  age  endorsed  them  and  approved  them  as  eter- 
nal verities,  radically  distinguished  from  all  mere 
temporary  adjustments  to  passing  conditions. 

But  this  illustrates  only  one  side  of  our  method's 
working  —  the  conservative.  On  the  other  hand 
its  progressive,  transforming  power  has  been  most 
strikingly  illustrated  during  the  last  half-century 
in  the  production  of  what  we  may  call  a  humanized 
theology.  Its  distinguishing  characteristics  have 
been,  first,  an  increased  respect  for  the  actualities 
of  religious  and  moral  development,  and,  second, 
the  courage  to  reconstruct  theology  in  reliance 
upon  them.  The  ground  assumed,  if  not  explicitly 
stated,  is  that  the  realities  of  a  continually  widen- 
ing experience  constitute  an  additional  revelation 
not  inferior  in  value,  or  authority,  to  the  revela- 
tions of  past  ages;  and  further,  that  where  the 
later  revelation  conflicts  with  the  earlier,  it  must 
be  given  the  right  of  way.  The  adoption  of  this 
new  standpoint  and  method  has  enabled  us  to 


CONCERNING  METHOD  25 

look  through  and  beyond  dogmas  that,  in  the  past, 
bounded  our  vision.  It  has  constrained  us  to  see 
the  truths  that  some  of  these  embodied  in  such 
different  settings  and  relations  that,  except  for 
labels,  we  should  never  recognize  them. 

To  those  not  in  sympathy  with  this  movement, 
who  pass  judgment  upon  it  from  the  outside,  it 
may  well  seem  as  if  the  end  of  all  things 
theological  were  at  hand.  Diverse  and  endless 
changes,  some  of  them  of  the  deepest  significance, 
have  followed  one  upon  another.  Some  of  these 
have  been  amplifications,  some  have  been  atten- 
uations. In  a  critical  age  the  one  class  as  well 
as  the  other  increases  the  feeling  of  instability. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  those  who  are  of  the  new 
order  and  understand  it  are  hopefully  cognizant 
of  a  process  of  reintegration,  a  new  and  vigorous 
growth,  that  will  make  both  religion  and  religious 
doctrine  far  more  potent  factors  in  the  lives  of 
men  than  they  have  hitherto  been. 

Ill 

That  this  hopeful  view  is  not  ill-founded  is  the 
confident  belief  of  the  writer,  but  it  seems  equally 
clear  that  its  realization  is  conditioned  upon  the 
unequivocal  acceptance  of  the  method  by  the 
use  of  which  it  has  been  generated.  As  matters 
stand,  there  is  an  ambiguity  attaching  to  the 
derivation  of  our  larger  constructions  which  affects 
not  only  those  who  judge  from  the  outside,  but 
also,  most  prejudicially,  the  constructive  work 


26  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

itself.  However  well  thought  out  our  new  creed 
may  be,  so  long  as  the  old  claims  of  authority  are, 
in  any  measure,  recognized,  we  hold  it  weakly. 
We  may  reach  new  statements  of  doctrine  that 
altogether  commend  themselves  to  our  expanding 
knowledge  and  to  our  modern  ways  of  thinking 
and  feeling,  but  the  question  always  arises,  On 
what  do  these  rest?  Is  the  fact  of  their  agree- 
ableness  to  us,  or  to  those  in  like  circumstances,  a 
trustworthy  evidence  of  their  validity?  Or,  must 
we  regard  them  simply  as  makeshifts,  adjusted  to 
our  special  wants?  This,  it  seems  to  me,  is  a 
consideration  that  demands  our  serious  attention, 
both  for  the  strengthening  of  ourselves  in  the 
courage  of  our  convictions,  and  also  for  inspiring 
those  who  are  looking  on  from  the  outside  with 
respect  for  them. 

While  we  have  been  working  toward  the  formu- 
lation of  these  larger  views,  we  have  lived  in  the 
conviction  that  there  was  some  underlying  justifi- 
cation for  the  course  we  were  taking.  The  first 
steps  may  have  been  fraught  with  anxiety,  but, 
as  we  have  gone  on,  our  courage  has  been  re-en- 
forced. We  have  felt  assured  that  there  was 
firm  ground  under  us.  The  time  has  come  for  us 
to  define  clearly  what  the  nature  of  this  ground 
is,  and  cutting  ourselves  loose  from  other  reliance, 
to  take  our  stand  squarely  on  it.  To  this  we  are 
not  only  invited,  but,  in  the  interests  of  survival, 
coerced.  Theology  cannot  exist  among  the  forces 
that  influence  the  world,  otherwise. 


CONCERNING  METHOD  27 

I  have  ventured  to  say  that  the  time  has  come, 
not  in  view  of  the  general  principle  that  "  there 
is  no  time  like  the  present ,"  but  because  there 
never  has  been  a  time  like  the  present.  The 
onward  movement  of  thought  that  has  constrained 
us  to  remodel  our  theology  has  been  gradually 
transforming  some  of  our  most  deep-seated  con- 
ceptions, thereby  making  feasible  necessary 
changes  in  our  mental  adjustments  that  in  other 
days  were  impossible.  Professor  Kirksopp  Lake 
has  recently  called  attention  to  the  fact  that 
human  nature  will  often  listen  to  a  reformer  who 
wishes  to  change  either  the  appearance  or  the 
substance  of  belief,  but  not  to  one  who  attacks 
both  simultaneously:  "One  generation  alters  the 
substance,  but  leaves  the  appearance;  the  next 
sees  the  inconsistency,  and  changes  the  appearance 
as  well.  It  takes  two  generations  to  complete  the 
process,  and  that  is  reform ;  if  the  attempt  is  made 
to  do  both  at  once,  it  becomes  revolution."  * 

The  substance  of  our  theology  has  been  chang- 
ing through  many  generations,  but  most  rapidly 
during  the  last  half-century.  The  method  also 
has  been  changing,  but  much  less  rapidly.  The 
inconsistency  between  the  two  becomes  every 
day  more  obvious  and  more  embarrassing.  The 
times  are  ripe  for  the  definite  adjustment  of  the 
latter  to  the  former.  It  is  but  the  consummation 
of  a  process  that  is  already  far  advanced.  We 

*  "Harvard  Theological  Review,"  January,  1911,  "The  Shep- 
herd of  Hennas." 


28  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

have  been  gradually  weaning  our  religious  beliefs 
from  dependence  upon  miracle  and  extra-natural 
authority.  Whatever  view  we  might  take  of  the 
asserted  impossibility  of  extraordinary  events  in 
a  world  governed  by  law,  we  have  felt  that 
there  existed  a  better  foundation  or  derivation  for 
spiritual  beliefs,  than  that  afforded  by  historical 
events  of  the  miraculous  order.  We  have  there- 
fore quietly  transferred  our  valuables.  We  have 
found  attachments  for  them  in  nature,  in  the 
human  nature  that  we  believe  to  be  an  emana- 
tion from  the  Divine. 

But  we  do  not  quite  give  up  the  old  de- 
pendence. Mount  Sinai,  the  miraculous  birth  of 
Christ,  the  endorsement  by  the  Holy  Ghost  at 
the  time  of  His  baptism,  His  Resurrection  and 
Ascension,  the  Pentecostal  outpouring  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  so  many  of  the  other  recorded 
miracles  as  seem  necessary  for  the  conservation 
of  the  faith  we  still  enshrine  and  guard  as  sacred. 
There  are,  we  say,  certain  ultimate  facts  of  our 
religion  which  cannot  be  deduced  from  the  ele- 
ments of  human  experience,  that  are  quite  outside 
its  sphere  and  apparently  antagonistic  to  it. 
Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  continuity  of  human 
life  beyond  the  grave,  and  such  also  that  of  the 
new  birth.  It  is  the  belief  of  the  writer  that  this 
view  of  the  necessity  of  extra  support  is  not  only 
false,  but  pernicious;  that  these  doctrines,  in  the 
light  of  our  increased  knowledge,  are  hi  no  need 


CONCERNING  METHOD  29 

of  miraculous  endorsement,  that  they  can  stand 
alone  and  develop  a  far  greater  strength  without 
such  endorsement.  The  reasons  for  this  belief 
will  be  given  in  some  of  the  succeeding  chapters. 

IV 

One  of  the  great  obstacles  in  the  way  of  the 
definite  abandonment  of  the  old  and  the  adoption 
of  the  newer  method  has  been  the  survival  of  a 
crude,  primitive  conception  of  what  constitutes 
stability.  In  the  light  of  our  larger  knowledge 
there  has  been  a  complete  reorganization  of  this 
conception.  Our  whole  thought  of  the  world  has 
been  changing  from  the  static  to  the  kinetic. 
Immobility  is  no  longer  a  synonym  for  stability. 
We  learned,  a  few  centuries  ago,  that  the  planet 
on  which  we  live,  instead  of  being,  as  we  had 
hitherto  believed,  a  fixture  in  space,  was  travelling 
through  it  with  incredible  velocity.  And,  from 
that  time  on,  one  revelation  of  science  after 
another  has  brought  home  to  us  the  fact  that 
what  we  call  stability,  —  that  which,  as  related 
to  us,  is  stability,  is  nothing  other  than  an 
equilibrium  of  forces. 

To  bring  the  different  departments  of  life  and 
thought  into  harmony  with  this,  has  been  slow 
work.  But,  however  long  it  may  take,  all  our 
thought  must,  soon  or  late,  come  to  it.  And  each 
department,  when  the  adjustment  is  made,  ex- 
periences a  new  birth.  Theology  must  emerge 
from  it  with  a  quickened  life  and  a  more  stable 


30  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

faith.  But  the  stability  will  not  be  of  the  kind 
that  our  ancestors  desired.  We  think  in  tropes 
and  analogies.  The  stability  of  the  past  found 
its  analogue  in  foundations;  the  rocks  and  the 
everlasting  hills  were  used  as  the  expression  of  it. 
Unchangeableness  was  its  essential  characteristic. 
To-day  our  type  of  stability  is  an  organization  of 
harmonized  forces  that  mutually  support  and 
modify  each  other.  Our  future  system  of  doctrines 
will  not  be  a  skilfully  constructed  mosaic,  for  ever 
repeating  the  same  message  in  terms  of  stone, 
but  rather  a  living  landscape,  which  changes 
from  day  to  day,  as  the  spring  advances,  yet 
without  losing  its  essential  characteristics. 

Our  corporate  faith  will  be  a  living  organism 
exercising  vital  functions.  It  will  be  nourished 
continually  by  new  material,  some  of  which  it 
will  assimilate  and  some  of  which  it  will  discard. 
Being  alive,  it  will  have  the  power  of  eliminating 
worn-out,  or  alien,  material  that  would  otherwise 
poison  the  system.  Our  inability  to  do  this, 
while  harbouring  the  old  superstition  of  finality 
and  inviolability,  is  manifest;  and  equally  mani- 
fest is  the  ease  with  which  this  function  of  elimi- 
nation and  rectification  works  in  the  scientific 
method. 

A  large  part  of  our  organized  science  is  prac- 
tically established.  We  do  not  anticipate  any 
essential  changes  in  it.  It  is  sufficiently  fixed 
to  live  by  and  to  work  by.  But  in  addition  to 
this  it  has  extensive  outlying  attachments  that 


CONCERNING  METHOD  31 

are  in  all  stages  of  uncertainty.  It  entertains 
innumerable  hypotheses  that  eventually  come  to 
nothing.  It  now  and  then  ventures  upon  great 
generalizations  that,  discredited  by  a  wider  induc- 
tion, have  to  be  withdrawn.  It  makes  no  end  of 
mistakes,  and  it  is  not  afraid  of  making  them, 
because  they  are  not  vital,  they  can  be  easily 
rectified.  It  owes  all  its  progress  to  freedom  of 
speculation  and  experiment.  Its  cherished  results 
are  the  survivors  of  a  searching  ordeal.  Its 
motto  is  "  Prove  all  things,  hold  fast  that  which 
is  good." 

This,  I  conceive,  is  what  our  reorganized  the- 
ology should  be.  And  when  it  shall  have  reached 
this  stage  of  development,  it  will  find  magnificent 
opportunities  open  to  it.  The  same  onward 
movement  that  has  brought  it  blindfold,  by  a  way 
that  it  knew  not,  will  lead  it  open-eyed  into  a 
realm  of  boundless  extent  and  endless  activity. 
The  way  is  clear  for  us  to  go  in  and  possess  this 
promised  land;  gates  have  been  opened  wide  where 
we  have,  till  now,  imagined  only  a  dead  wall. 
The  nature  that  we  study  to-day  is  another  world 
from  that  which  confronted  our  ancestors  even  a 
generation  ago.  Theirs  was  a  nature  out  of  focus, 
-a  nature  so  misconceived  that  every  specula- 
tive truth  gathered  from  it  was  to  some  extent 
an  untruth.  The  inferences  from  it  were  not 
all  error:  they  embodied  some  great  elemental 
truths,  but  these  were  out  of  relation  to  each  other. 
Nature  told  no  clear,  coherent  story.  Its  testi- 


32  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

mony  in  one  direction  seemed  to  invalidate  that 
which  it  gave  in  another.  So  far  as  practical 
relations  were  concerned,  men  learned,  experi- 
mentally, to  adjust  themselves  to  it;  but  when 
they  tried  to  use  the  knowledge  so  acquired  for 
excursions  into  the  unknown,  they  were  baffled 
by  contradictions. 

To  overcome  these  they  invented  expedients 
which,  though  serviceable  in  some  relations,  ob- 
structed the  way  to  the  larger  view.  Thus, 
nature  was  separated  into  two  departments,  or 
spheres,  of  influence;  the  one  embracing  its 
uniformities,  the  other  its  exceptional  events. 
The  former  were  calculable  and  conceived  of 
through  the  analogy  of  mechanism;  the  latter, 
assumed  to  be  incalculable,  were  conceived  through 
the  analogy  of  mind.  The  former  represented  the 
idea  of  permanence  and  unchangeable  order,  the 
latter  the  idea  of  interference  and  new  departures. 
The  conception  of  continuous  movement  and 
gradual  change  had  no  part  in  this  thought  of 
the  universe.  The  phenomena  of  growth  and  of 
individual  development  were,  it  is  true,  always  in 
evidence,  but  they  were  regarded  as  a  mere  play 
on  the  surface,  —  petty  cycles  of  change  that  left 
all  things  as  they  were.  Its  conception  of  impor- 
tant change  was  that  of  a  more  or  less  violent 
break  with  an  established  past,  followed  by  a 
permanently  fixed  new  order. 

To  a  theology  dominated  by  ruling  ideas  of 
this  kind  the  discoveries  of  science  were  necessarily 


CONCERNING  METHOD  33 

destructive.  They  subjected  it  to  repeated  earth- 
quake shocks,  without  offering  any  assistance  in 
the  way  of  reconstruction.  In  the  conflict  which 
ensued,  science,  young,  active,  progressive,  had 
every  advantage  against  a  theology  sheltered 
behind  fortifications  and  unprogressive.  The 
whole  territory  on  which  it  depended  for  support 
was  invaded  and  ravaged  by  the  enemy.  The 
realm  of  the  supernatural  was  day  by  day  trans- 
formed and  added  to  the  realm  of  the  natural. 
Every  attempt  at  reprisal  was  abortive.  The 
established  theology,  that  had  for  ages  ruled  the 
world,  was  more  and  more  hemmed  in,  depleted, 
and  shorn  of  its  prestige. 

But  in  the  onward  march  of  the  great  process 
it  is  the  unexpected  that  happens.  Speculative 
science,  so  orderly,  so  sure  of  itself  and  of  its 
future,  conceived  and  brought  forth  a  mon- 
strosity. Hitherto  all  its  great  principles  could 
be  expressed  in  terms  of  mechanism  and  mathe- 
matics; but  now,  from  the  department  of  biology, 
there  came  a  generalization  far  greater,  more 
comprehensive,  more  dominating  than  any  that 
had  gone  before  it. 

Evolution,  though  the  legitimate  offspring  of 
science,  was  not  in  harmony  with  it.  Not  only 
did  it  stand  aloof  from  its  formulated  principles, 
but  it  seemed  to  carry  implications  that  invali- 
dated the  most  fundamental  of  them.  Until  now 
science  had  met  no  check  for  the  simple  reason 
that  it  had  occupied  itself  with  one  aspect  of 
3 


34  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

nature,  that  of  its  instrumentalities.  But  this 
new  generalization,  while  forcing  it  to  extend  its 
domains,  at  the  same  time  laid  upon  it  the  necessity 
of  adjusting  itself  to  new  conditions.  Until  now 
science  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  question 
of  origins.  It  contemptuously  surrendered  this 
to  theology  and  made  light  of  its  fanciful  con- 
structions. But  this  great  modern,  overarching 
principle,  of  which  it  was  so  justly  proud,  made 
the  consideration  of  origins  a  necessity.  And 
the  "Origin  of  Species'7  was  its  first  message 
to  the  world  at  large. 

The  conservators  of  theology  were  so  taken  up 
with  the  revolutionizing  effects  of  the  new  doc- 
trine upon  its  own  special  interests  as  to  be  quite 
unobservant  of  its  disorganizing  reactions  in  the 
camp  of  science.  And  even  now,  half  a  century 
from  its  inception,  this  aspect  of  the  situation  is 
not  half  recognized.  Let  us  look  at  it  for  a  mo- 
ment, for  it  will  help  us  to  understand  the  relation 
which  this  world-transforming  principle  sustains 
to  theology  on  the  one  hand  and  to  science  on 
the  other. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  perceive  that  the  new  light 
that  broke  upon  the  scientific  world  with  evolu- 
tion shook  the  conception  of  the  uniformity  of 
nature  as  severely  as  this  latter  had  shaken  the 
idea  of  disorderly  interference.  The  task,  thence- 
forth, laid  upon  the  rigidly  orthodox  school  of 
science  was  clear  enough.  They  must  prove  that 
evolution  can  be  explained  satisfactorily  from  the 


CONCERNING  METHOD  35 

standpoint  of  physical  forces  alone,  or  failing  this, 
they  must  be  reduced  to  holding  their  dogma  of 
pan-mechanism  as  a  very  questionable  matter  of 
faith. 

There  was  a  distinguished  group  of  scientific 
moderates,  if  we  may  so  call  them,  who  never 
held  the  extreme  position  with  regard  to  the  suffi- 
ciency of  physical  forces.  While  accepting  the 
great  fact  of  evolution  as  a  legitimate  outcome 
of  the  inductive  method,  they  refused  to  subscribe 
to  the  denial  of  anything  beyond  physical  forces. 
The  belief  in  a  great  intelligence  as  the  cause  of 
evolution  is  quite  compatible,  they  held,  with  all 
the  facts  on  which  that  doctrine  is  founded.  This 
attitude  of  eminent  scientists  gave  great  comfort 
to  theology.  In  the  midst  of  all  the  disarrange- 
ments introduced  by  evolution  there  was  hope  of 
coming  to  terms  with  it.  But  probably  no  one, 
hi  the  earlier  stages  of  the  great  controversy, 
dreamed  that  this  new  and  strange  doctrine 
might  provide  the  medium  for  a  theological 
renaissance,  that  it  could  furnish  the  positive, 
constructive  principles  for  a  stable  and  living 
orthodoxy. 

Not  at  the  beginning,  but  at  the  end  of  the 
great  effort  to  prove  the  sufficiency  of  physical 
causes,  could  this  aspect  of  the  case  appear.  The 
history  of  this  effort  is  of  the  greatest  interest 
and  significance.  It  would  be  a  most  valuable 
contribution  to  modern  thought  if  some  one, 
amply  equipped,  could  give  a  full  and  impartial 


36  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

account  of  it.  In  the  meantime  the  general 
trend  of  it  is  pretty  clearly  defined,  and  in  a  sub- 
sequent chapter  I  shall  try  to  outline  its  most 
salient  features  and  emphasize  the  important 
deductions  that  flow  from  them.  But  before  we 
enter  upon  this,  it  seems  worth  while  to  pass  in 
review  some  of  the  general  characteristics  of 
evolution  in  its  bearing  upon  religious  thought. 


CHAPTER  III 

GENERAL  ASPECTS   OF   EVOLUTION 

ASSUMING  evolution  to  be  true,  it  is 
a  very  great  truth, — a  truth  that  most 
profoundly  affects  our  views  not  only 
of  what  the  past  of  the  world  has  been,  but  what 
its  meaning  is  and  what  its  future  is  to  be.  It  is, 
in  one  sense,  the  greatest  of  all  the  revelations 
that  have  successively  dawned  upon  the  mind  of 
man.  It  is  the  greatest,  that  is,  in  the  sense  of 
being  a  whole,  all-embracing  revelation,  and  at  the 
same  time  one  that  is  pregnant  with  possibilities 
of  truth  yet  to  be  revealed.  It  is  the  greatest 
in  that  it  includes  all  other  revelations  and  im- 
mensely augments  their  value  by  giving  them 
their  proper  setting  as  parts  of  one  great  world 
manifestation. 

The  installation  of  this  great  principle  has 
been  in  itself  a  signal  triumph  of  the  inductive 
method  guided  by  analogy.  Suggested  by  the 
phenomena  of  reproduction  and  growth,  it  found 
a  place  in  Greek  philosophy  five  hundred  years 
before  Christ.  Through  all  the  ages  it  was 
re-suggested  and  fostered  by  the  ever-recurrent 
miracle  of  life  issuing  from  the  apparently  lifeless 

37 


38  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

material  of  the  egg.  But  it  held  its  place  only 
as  a  fancy  of  the  human  imagination  till  the 
growth  of  modern  science,  by  the  convergent 
testimony  of  its  many  departments,  substantiated 
the  dream  and  gave  it  a  place  of  honour  among 
its  well-attested  realities.  We  cannot  linger  upon 
this  most  interesting  phase  of  it,  for  we  are 
primarily  concerned  here,  not  with  how  it  came 
to  be,  but  with  what  it  is,  and  especially  with 
its  claim  to  our  confidence  as  a  guide  in  the  great 
matters  of  theology  and  religion. 


The  influence  of  evolution  upon  theology  pre- 
sents itself  in  a  threefold  aspect.  First,  as  de- 
structive, second,  as  transforming,  and  third,  as 
constructive;  and  the  order  of  this  statement  is,  at 
the  same  time,  the  order  of  their  relative  impor- 
tance and  of  the  attention  which,  as  three  stages 
of  development,  they  have  successively  received. 

When,  half  a  century  ago,  evolution  was  offered 
as  an  explanation  of  the  world,  the  destructive 
aspect  of  it,  as  regards  theology,  was  about  all 
that  a  considerable  element  in  the  church  could 
see.  Here  was  an  interpretation  of  things  that 
was  nothing  less  than  a  flat  contradiction  of 
revealed  truth.  It  seemed  to  strike  at  the  roots 
of  a  belief  in  God  as  the  Creator  of  the  world. 
It  assailed  that  cornerstone  of  theology  —  the 
fall  and  total  depravity  of  man  —  and,  in  its  ma- 
terialistic form,  seemed  to  extinguish  all  religion. 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         39 

Men  forged  no  end  of  hastily  constructed  and 
easily  demolished  arguments  against  it,  and  then, 
in  their  despair,  let  it  alone.  But  the  more 
patient  among  them  studied  and  tried  to  under- 
stand its  bearings  upon  what  the  religious  world 
had  hitherto  held  as  truth,  and  it  was  seen  to 
have  many  helpful  outlooks.  Gradually,  but 
steadily,  the  new  doctrine  found  its  way  into 
every  department  of  thought,  making  over  with- 
out violence  some  of  our  fundamental  conceptions. 
The  destructive  aspect  began  to  fade  before  the 
transforming.  Truths  that  seemed  to  have  dis- 
appeared returned  in  different  guise.  We  recog- 
nized them  as  the  same  old  truths,  yet  not  the 
same.  They  were  like  wanderers  who,  having 
gained  experience  in  their  absence,  come  back 
to  us  with  wider  outlooks  and  prophetic  eyes. 

The  importance  of  this  process  cannot  easily 
be  exaggerated,  yet  as  related  to  the  third  stage 
it  is  distinctly  subsidiary  and  preparatory.  Upon 
this  third  stage,  the  constructive,  we  have  as  yet 
hardly  entered.  Many  have  dreamed  of  its 
possibilities,  but  for  the  most  part  they  remain 
undeveloped. 

The  chief  concern,  both  of  philosophy  and 
theology,  is  to  systemize  our  knowledge  of  the 
world,  to  bring  it  into  such  a  unified,  homogeneous 
scheme  of  thought  that  every  part  of  it  shall 
support  every  other  part.  To  achieve  such  a 
conception  of  the  world  and  of  our  position  in 
it,  is  a  craving  of  the  mind  that  will  not  down. 


40  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

Until  we  reach  it,  the  different  aspects  of  the  world 
fight  against  each  other,  each  one  casting  doubt 
upon  and  invalidating  the  others.  Hitherto  phil- 
osophy has  sought  to  reach  this  much-desired 
synthesis  by  the  analytic  method.  Some  funda- 
mental principle,  it  was  hoped,  might  be  dis- 
covered, by  the  dissection  of  our  knowledge,  from 
which  to  deduce  our  convictions  about  the  world. 
But  neither  rest,  nor  guidance  for  the  human  soul, 
has  been  reached  by  this  dismembering  process. 
Laboriously  constructed  systems  have  been  formu- 
lated, but  when  these  have  been  brought  to  the 
test  they  have,  one  and  all,  proved  to  be  misfits. 
They  have  produced  in  their  constructions  only 
one  side  of  reality:  now,  the  reality  of  the  world 
of  things  as  known  from  the  outside,  now,  that 
of  the  world  of  thoughts  as  seen  from  within; 
the  other  side,  being  logically  excluded,  was 
necessarily  reduced  to  illusion. 

The  persistent  recurrence  of  this  failure  gradu- 
ally opened  the  eyes  of  philosophers  to  the  fact 
that  the  method  itself  was  at  fault,  that  the  prin- 
ciples reached  by  analysis  were  not,  in  any  sense, 
realities,  but  only  abstractions,  fragments  of  the 
complex  realities  of  experience,  which  could  pro- 
duce nothing  but  fragmentary  systems  bristling 
with  antagonisms. 

But,  now,  evolution  laying  at  the  feet  of  phil- 
osophy and  theology  an  achieved  synthesis  of  real 
knowledge,  provides  for  their  use  an  instrument 
on  which  they  have  bestowed  no  labour.  It  is  not 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         41 

indeed  the  same  kind  of  a  synthesis  as  that  sought 
by  philosophy.  It  has  nothing  to  say  to  the 
antinomies  and  deadlocks  of  the  abstractionists 
and  logicians.  It  is  a  real  synthesis,  —  one  great 
fact  made  up  of  all  the  facts  of  the  universe. 
In  its  comprehensive  scheme  all  things  are  seen 
to  be  related,  parts  of  each  other.  There  are 
no  exceptions  to  it.  It  is  informed  by  one  spirit, 
harmonized  by  great  laws  that  govern  it  through- 
out. It  is  the  disclosure  of  the  methods  by  which 
the  totality  of  things  has  come  into  being,  and 
presumably  of  the  methods  that  will  prevail 
in  all  future  development.  This  synthesis  is 
not  a  theology,  but  it  is  the  trustworthy  frame- 
work for  one.  We  shall  make  it  our  chart  and 
our  guide  through  the  intricacies  of  the  construc- 
tions that  we  have  to  formulate,  and  come  back 
to  it  as  the  touchstone  of  our  work. 

But,  before  entering  upon  this  work  in  detail, 
some  statement  of  the  more  general  aspects  of 
evolution,  in  its  bearing  upon  the  conceptions 
and  incentives  of  religion,  seems  desirable.  And 
in  the  presentation  of  these  I  must  anticipate 
the  argument  by  assuming,  tentatively,  that 
evolution  reveals  to  us  a  Supreme  Intelligence 
that  is  working  toward  ends  of  transcendent 
value. 

II 

First,  as  to  its  bearing  upon  the  idea  of  reve- 
lation. Our  inherited  theology  assumed  that  a 


42  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

revelation  from  God  to  men  must  be  a  thing 
foreign  to  the  natural  order,  —  an  irruption  into 
it.  It  must  be  special  in  its  nature  and  given 
under  special  and  miraculous  circumstances.  It 
must  be  vouched  for  not  only  by  the  internal 
testimony  of  its  value,  its  convincing  power,  but 
also  by  supernatural  accessories  that  should  give 
it  the  status  of  finality  and  authority.  Such  a 
revelation,  it  was  held,  had  been  given,  once  for 
all,  committed  to  writing,  and  further  put  into 
the  keeping  of  a  consecrated  body  of  men  who 
were  the  only  trustworthy  interpreters  of  it. 
But  at  the  same  time  another,  inferior  kind  of 
revelation,  coincident  with  the  order  of  nature, 
was  recognized.  The  innate  moral  sense  of  man 
was  the  source  of  such  a  revelation,  and  the 
works  of  God  in  the  midst  of  which  he  lived  was, 
more  or  less,  its  corroboration. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  a 
group  of  men,  who  passed  into  history  under  the 
name  of  Deists,  conceived  the  idea  of  shifting 
religious  faith  from  its  old  foundation  to  this 
latter  kind  of  revelation.  Impressed  with  the 
fact  that  belief  in  the  former  was  waning,  and 
seeing  in  this  the  threatened  collapse  of  all  religion, 
they  sought  to  work  out  from  natural  sources 
an  independent  foundation  for  its  essential  doc- 
trines. Neither  Church  nor  Scripture,  it  was 
held,  was  necessary  for  a  liveable  knowledge  of 
God,  since  He  was  continually  declaring  Himself 
both  in  nature  and  in  the  consciences  of  men. 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         43 

In  so  far  as  they  were  affirmative  the  funda- 
mental assumptions  of  these  men  were  a  move 
in  the  right  direction.  But  their  outlook  was 
narrow  and  their  negations  reacted  with  disastrous 
consequences.  The  whole  view  of  the  world  had 
to  be  changed  before  their  scheme  could  have  a 
chance  of  success.  The  imaginations  of  men 
were  dominated  by  the  conception  of  a  God  who 
dwelt  apart  from  the  world  and  manifested  Him- 
self in  it  only  at  critical  intervals  and  in  extraor- 
dinary ways.  The  innovators  themselves  were 
only  partially  emancipated  from  the  spell.  They 
shared  the  limitation  of  view  that  accepted  the 
oppositions  of  their  day  as  final  and  irreducible. 
They  could  not  rise  to  that  higher  synthesis  that 
sees  in  such  contradictions  only  one-sided  aspects 
of  the  truth.  Because  the  claim  of  the  Church  to 
absolute,  exclusive  authority  seemed  to  them  un- 
founded, they  were  unable  to  allow  to  the  body 
of  truth  which  it  represented  any  special  value. 

Looked  at  from  the  higher  point  of  view,  which 
they  could  not  reach,  the  antagonism  between 
what  the  Deists  called  human  reason  and  rev- 
elation disappears.  They  are,  at  bottom,  one. 
They  are  different  workings  of  the  same  spirit. 
They  are  both  the  outcome  of  the  divine  influence 
operating  through  the  faculties  of  man.  They 
are  both  revelations  of  God  to  man,  and  they 
must  work  toward  the  same  end.  They  corrobo- 
rate each  other. 

The  witness  of  the  human  spirit  to  the  reality 


44  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

and  character  of  God,  uttered  centuries  ago  and 
established  in  the  consciousness  of  the  race  by 
the  recognition  of  its  truth,  bears  somewhat  the 
same  relation  to  modern  thought  that  the  experi- 
ence-bought body  of  common-sense,  by  which 
we  live,  bears  to  the  additional  knowledge  that 
is  every  day  flowing  in  upon  us.  We  do  not,  if 
we  are  sane,  pour  contempt  upon  the  organized 
body  of  our  practical  beliefs,  because  they  have 
to  be  modified  to  adjust  them  to  such  additional 
knowledge.  Except  for  the  possession  of  such  a 
compacted,  articulated  consensus  of  belief  we 
should  have  nothing  to  make  our  new  knowledge 
intelligible.  All  our  working  intelligence  is  based 
upon  a  knowledge  of  relations,  and  if  we  have 
no  defined,  abiding  body  of  practical  certainty 
to  which  our  new  facts  stand  in  some  sort  of 
relation,  they  are  devoid  of  meaning.  They 
flow  into  and  out  of  our  ken,  leaving  no  trace 
behind.  We  may  believe  that  quadrupeds  and 
birds  see  the  same  things  in  our  common  environ- 
ment that  we  see.  But  they  cannot  see  these  in 
the  same  way,  because  of  the  absence  of  ante- 
cedent knowledge  to  which  to  relate  them. 

The  body  of  essential  spiritual  beliefs  that  we 
have  inherited  from  the  past  are,  like  the  con- 
victions of  our  practical  common-sense,  part 
and  parcel  of  our  lives.  They  have  been  tested 
through  all  the  ages  and  found  to  work.  How- 
ever we  may  try  to  ignore  them  theoretically,  or 
explain  them  away  scientifically  or  logically, 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         45 

they  are  still  with  us,  cropping  up  in  a  thousand 
different  forms,  when  we  least  expect  them.  We 
cannot  get  rid  of  them,  because  we  are  essentially 
the  same  kind  of  men  as  those  through  whom  they 
first  found  utterance.  Unless  those  who  first 
put  these  transcendent  beliefs  into  words  and 
those  who  originally  accepted  and  lived  in  the 
light  of  them  had  been  endued  with  the  same 
spiritual  instincts,  these  revelations  would  have 
been  stillborn  utterances,  the  idle  sayings  of 
unbalanced  minds;  and  unless  the  generations 
following  had  continued  of  like  natures,  having 
the  same  religious  needs  and  insights,  they  would 
have  been  utterly  unable  to  retain  them.  The 
divine  light  that  in  former  days  streamed  from 
prophets  and  poets  was  latent  in  other  human 
souls.  The  seers  called  it  into  activity,  and  it 
has  never  ceased  to  shine,  because  it  is  ever 
renewed  from  the  same  divine  source. 

God  has  not  spoken  once  or  twice,  He  has  not 
made  one,  or  two,  or  three  revelations.  He  is 
always  speaking,  always  revealing  Himself,  and 
in  every  age  more  fully  and  clearly.  The  old 
light  is  not  quenched,  but  made  incomparably 
brighter.  The  later  illuminations  disclose  con- 
tinually new  values  in  those  of  a  former  day. 
The  original  reception  of  our  inherited  spiritual 
beliefs  was  the  response  of  soul  to  soul,  but  it  is 
use  that  has  established  them,  the  test  of  life's 
wear  and  tear  that  has  made  them  an  insepa- 
rable part  of  our  moral  consciousness. 


46  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

It  is  a  great  mistake  to  think  of  the  efforts  of 
the  Deists  as  altogether  failures.  They  bore 
some  good  fruit  in  their  time.  They  not  only 
kept  men's  minds  busy  with  the  essentials  of 
religion,  but  they  established  some  of  the  funda- 
mental positions  on  which  the  use  of  their  method 
hinges.  They  established  them  so  firmly  that 
then:  opponents,  the  advocates  of  a  special, 
miraculously  revealed  religion,  were  constrained 
to  use  the  same  method  to  establish  the  credibil- 
ity of  their  position.  It  was  a  continuity  when 
Bishop  Butler,  whom  Chalmers  calls  the  "  Bacon 
of  theology/'  gave  to  the  world  his  great  work 
"The  Analogy  of  Religion."  * 

But,  as  we  have  implied,  a  use  of  the  same 
method  to-day  would  move  on  radically  different 
lines  and  build  with  much  new  material.  The 
perspective  that  has  been  introduced  into  all  our 
views  of  things  by  the  discovery  of  evolution  is, 
in  itself,  a  great  transforming  influence,  and  the 
study  of  the  nature  and  history  of  the  writings 
that  constitute  our  Bible  has  also  done  much  to 
sweep  away  the  barrier  that  separates  what  the 
older  controvertialists  held  to  be  two  kinds  of 
religion,  —  natural  and  revealed.  With  our  wider 
outlook,  these  two  diverse  sources  of  religion 
merge  into  one.  There  is  one  great  and  all-com- 
prehensive revelation,  continuous,  homogeneous, 
and  consistent  in  its  methods,  just  as  there  is 
one  world-process.  We  are  differently  related  to 

*  Mark  Pattison,  "  Essays  and  Reviews." 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         47 

different  parts  of  it,  knowing  some  from  within, 
subjectively,  knowing  others  by  observation  and 
study  from  without.  We  might  be  tempted  to 
say  that  natural  religion  has  absorbed  revealed, 
because  its  methods  must  eventually  prevail  in 
both  departments.  But  a  truer  expression  of  the 
change  would  be  to  say  that  all  religion  is  the 
outcome  of  one  continuous  world-revelation,  and 
that  the  most  luminous  part  of  this  is  that  which 
appeals  directly  to  man's  religious  consciousness. 

The  claim  of  a  supernatural  revelation,  different 
in  kind  from  all  others,  had  a  great  truth  at  the 
heart  of  it.  For,  in  the  race  from  which  our 
religion  has  come  to  us,  there  was  an  early  devel- 
opment of  God-consciousness  that  is  unique  in 
human  history.  Individuals  sprang  from  that 
simple  and  crude  civilization  who  seem  to  have 
had  very  little  in  common  with  it.  Their  deep 
and  assured  visions  of  spiritual  truth,  their  fervid 
utterances,  and  their  intense  convictions  were 
like  new  elements  in  human  evolution. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  seers  and  the 
prophets  were  not  separated  from  subsequent 
generations  by  any  radical  peculiarity.  God 
revealed  Himself  in  the  consciousness  of  these 
great  lights  of  the  world  by  the  same  methods  as 
those  by  which  He  reveals  Himself  in  the  moral 
and  religious  consciousness  of  every  man.  The 
light  that  shone  in  them  with  such  intensity  was 
not,  in  any  way,  other  than  that  which  "lighteth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world."  Had  it 


48  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

been  otherwise,  how  should  the  world  have  known 
that  these  men  spoke  the  truth  of  God?  It  is 
because  this  light  dwells  in  humanity  at  large, 
not  because  it  is  something  foreign  to  its  nature 
and  beyond  its  comprehension,  that  we  are  able 
to  take  the  revelations  that  came  through  these 
men  to  our  hearts  and  feel  sure  that  we  make  no 
mistake  when  we  fall  down  and  worship  the  God 
they  have  made  known  to  us. 

Ill 

A  second  characteristic  of  evolution,  when  used 
constructively  in  the  science  of  theology,  is  that 
it  vitalizes  at  the  same  time  that  it  rectifies  our 
old  beliefs.  An  inherent  source  of  weakness  in 
our  established  theology  has  been  its  apparent 
contradictions,  and  our  efforts  to  reconcile  these, 
without  transforming  its  doctrines,  have  been 
unavailing.  At  times  it  has  seemed  to  have 
become  a  matter  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest: 
some  of  them  might  be  retained  if  others  were 
discarded;  but  again  it  has  looked  as  if  all  must 
be  rejected  and  a  new  beginning  made.  I  think 
we  may  say  that  these  antagonisms  have  been 
owing,  partly  to  the  narrow  outlooks  and  applica- 
tions of  the  separate  doctrines,  partly  to  the 
relations  in  which  they  have  stood  to  each  other, 
but  mainly  and  essentially  to  the  fact  that  they 
have  been  produced  in  an  intellectual  atmosphere 
of  unreality  by  the  use  of  abstractions.  The 
defect  in  our  system  is  a  radical  one,  and  it  can 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         49 

be  overcome  by  no  manipulation  of  details,  but 
only  by  a  change  as  radical  as  the  fallacy  from 
which  it  springs. 

Evolution  offers  a  deliverance  from  this  reign 
of  inconsequence  and  disorder  by  providing  the 
means  for  the  transference  of  the  whole  body  of 
our  religious  truth  from  a  rationalistic  to  an  actu- 
alistic  basis.  It  is  not  the  abrogation  of  vital 
principles  that  confronts  us,  but  their  restatement, 
readjustment,  and  derivation  from  legitimate 
and  verifiable  sources.  Evolution,  while  trans- 
forming our  inherited  doctrines,  leaves  all  the 
incentives  to  religion  which  they  contain  not  only 
alive,  but  much  more  alive  than  under  the  old 
regime. 

It  does  this,  first,  by  setting  our  intellectual 
house  in  order,  by  giving  us  coherence  and  con- 
tinuity in  the  place  of  dislocations  and  inconsist- 
encies. It  must  do  this  if  we  trust  to  it;  for  it  is 
itself  a  disclosure  of  the  continuity  and  coherence 
of  all  things.  The  escape  from  the  old  intellec- 
tual order  into  the  new  is  like  being  brought 
from  the  dimness  of  a  prison  into  the  broad  light 
of  day.  It  may  take  a  little  time  to  accustom 
our  eyes  to  the  new  conditions.  But  the  light 
was  made  for  the  eye  and  the  eye  for  the  light, 
and  unless  the  eye  be  fatally  injured  by  disuse, 
the  light  will  reveal  to  it  a  new  heaven  and  a 
new  earth  and  generate  a  new  courage  and  a 
new  joy  in  living.  With  a  changed  concep- 
tion of  the  relations  which  God  sustains  to  His 
4 


50  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

world,  one  doctrine  after  another,  purged  of  its 
impurities  and  limitations,  falls  into  place.  We 
have  a  story  of  the  past  that  is  coherent,  and  a 
look  into  the  future  that  is,  to  the  last  degree, 
inspiring  and  sustaining. 

What  are  the  chief  requirements  of  a  satis- 
factory religion?  What  do  we  demand  that  it 
shall  do  for  us?  I  will  venture,  in  a  comprehen- 
sive way,  to  answer,  We  ask  that  it  shall  give  us 
something  worth  living  for,  something  that  is 
definite,  and  at  the  same  time  not  too  difficult. 
It  must  be  something  hard  to  achieve,  but  not 
impossible.  It  must  be  an  ideal  good  that 
promises  to  us  progressive  realization.  It  must 
be  difficult  enough  to  awaken  all  our  powers  and 
ambitions.  It  must  appear  sufficiently  practicable 
to  keep  our  courage  and  enthusiasm  aglow.  It 
must  call  into  action  every  department  of  the 
higher  nature.  The  intellect  must  have  its  share. 
There  must  be  problems  for  solution,  unexplored 
regions  to  be  opened  and  developed.  The  emo- 
tional nature  must  find  in  it  a  full  and  persistent 
satisfaction.  It  must  not  only  rouse  love  and 
loyalty,  it  must  develop,  increase,  and  sustain 
them.  It  must,  in  a  word,  be  inexhaustible. 

An  adequate  religion  will  be  so  adapted  to 
our  human  needs  that  it  will  minister  equally  to 
the  static,  quiescent,  contemplative  side  of  our 
nature  and  to  the  dynamic,  energetic,  undertak- 
ing side  of  it.  It  is  to  the  bearing  of  evolution 
upon  this  latter  requirement  that  I  would  call 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         51 

attention  here.  It  points  most  unmistakably 
and  persistently  to  a  future  good  to  be  achieved. 
Great  as  is  the  light  that  it  sends  back  into  the 
past,  that  which  it  sends  streaming  into  the 
future  is  a  matter  of  far  intenser  interest  and 
greater  value  to  the  human  race.  In  it  the  past, 
the  present,  and  the  future  are  brought  together 
into  one  homogeneous  whole.  There  is  one 
grand  progressive  movement  from  the  beginning 
to  the  farthest  limits  of  our  imaginations,  —  one 
theme  and  one  all-sufficient  God,  who,  in  a  world 
of  conflict  and  through  conflict,  has  carried  His 
creation  from  one  stage  of  achievement  to 
another. 

This  aspect  of  the  situation  is  fitted  to  call  out 
all  that  is  strong  and  noble  and  aspiring  within 
us.  Here  is  man  with  a  bewildering  wealth  of 
powers,  natural  and  acquired,  surrounded  by  an 
accumulation  of  inherited  materials,  mental  and 
physical,  —  a  superb  equipment  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  some  great  end.  What  shall  it  be? 
The  great  world-process,  to  the  knowledge  of 
which  he  has  but  just  come,  has  an  answer  ready 
for  him.  It  declares  man  to  be  a  factor  in  a  not- 
yet-completed  process.  The  process  is  matter 
of  history.  The  incompleteness  is  no  less  so. 
All  human  experience  has  testified  to  it,  and  the 
insistent  reaching  out  for  further  realization  is  a 
continued  endorsement  of  the  assumption  that 
the  accomplishment  of  the  future  of  evolution 
depends  very  largely  upon  man  himself. 


52  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

Pre-eminent  among  his  powers  is  that  of  fore- 
casting the  future,  so  as  to  be  able  to  shape  wisely 
his  activities  with  reference  to  it.  His  study  of 
the  past  is  mainly  valuable  as  it  contributes  to 
the  enlargement  of  this  power  by  supplying 
materials  for  its  use.  Every  step  upward  in  his 
long  career  has  been  characterized  by  an  increase 
of  this  ability  to  shape  his  future,  and  with  this 
increase  a  larger  measure  of  responsibility  has 
been  laid  upon  him.  With  the  knowledge  of 
evolution  there  has  come  a  tremendous  increase 
of  it.  Hitherto  this  power  has  had  reference  to 
parts  of  his  life,  to  his  development  or  achieve- 
ment in  this  direction  or  in  that.  Now,  it  addresses 
itself  to  the  one  supreme  issue  of  the  great  process 
of  which  he  must  believe  himself  to  be  the  latest 
and  highest  product  and,  under  God,  the  most 
important  factor. 

Is  it  possible  for  us  so  to  forecast  this  future 
as  to  attain  to  a  practical,  helpful  knowledge  of 
the  direction  that  further  evolution  must  take? 
I  believe  this  to  be  not  only  possible,  but  also 
the  great  and  necessary  work  of  the  present  day, 
—  a  work  that  we  cannot  shirk  without  giving 
away  our  birthright.  We  have  found  many 
uses  for  our  God-given  intelligence  in  the  past, 
we  have  served  our  smaller  interests  with  it, 
and  now  that  a  task  of  far  greater  range  and 
import  has  been  appointed  to  us  we  cannot  turn 
aside  without  dishonour. 

It  is  rather  overwhelming  to  the  imagination, 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         53 

this  work  which  evolution  lays  upon  us,  and  we 
shall  not  accomplish  it  in  a  moment.  As  in  the 
prosecution  of  the  quests  of  purely  physical 
science,  we  shall  probably  have  to  form  many 
hypotheses  before  we  reach  one  which  proves 
altogether  workable.  But,  evolution  is  not  an 
inexorably  hard  taskmaster.  Though  it  provides 
us  with  a  great  problem,  it  at  the  same  time 
supplies  new  and  most  helpful  conditions  for  its 
solution.  The  questions  which  the  old  theology 
set  itself  to  answer  ranged  through  the  regions  of 
infinity  and  eternity,  they  concerned  themselves 
with  the  mysteries  of  ontology.  But,  if  our 
problem  is  deep  and  wide,  as  related  to  our 
intellects,  it  is  quite  within  the  sphere  of  human 
knowledge  and  experience  and  is  propounded  to 
us  in  terms  of  actuality.  We  are  brought  back, 
by  a  sudden  discovery,  into  a  wonted  way. 
Our  conceptions  are  called  in  from  wandering 
to  and  fro  through  the  universe  to  concen- 
trate themselves  upon  limited  and  measurable 
interests. 

The  great  process  with  which  we  have  to  do 
presents  us  not  with  a  universal  problem,  but 
with  one  cycle  of  it.  It  is  a  matter  of  this  earth 
with  which  we  are  concerned.  As  in  pre-Co- 
pernican  days,  we  may  think  of  our  little  planet, 
if  not  as  the  centre,  at  least  as  our  centre.  We 
may  exercise  our  imaginations  and  form  our 
conjectures  as  to  what  great  cycles  of  evolution 
lie  beyond  and  comprehend  ours,  but  these 


54  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

speculations  are  of  no  vital  importance  to  us. 
The  drama  of  evolution  with  which  we  are  ac- 
quainted and  of  which  we  are  a  part  has  had  its 
beginnings  here  on  our  earth.  Here  it  has 
grown  from  what,  to  our  apprehension,  was 
absolutely  without  life  into  the  fullness  of  the 
diversified  and  organized  existence  in  the  midst 
of  which  we  find  ourselves.  The  history  of  the 
process  from  inorganic  matter,  through  all  the 
ascending  stages  of  existence,  is  our  history.  We 
are  the  highest  outcome  of  it  all.  The  value 
and  significance  of  it  is  in  us  and  in  what  we 
are  to  become. 

The  fact  that  this  field  has  been  already 
exploited  with  unsatisfactory,  and  sometimes 
deplorable,  results  should  not  deter  us  from  fur- 
ther endeavours  in  the  same  direction  nor  damp 
our  ardour.  We  cannot  question  the  proposition 
that  a  well-founded  knowledge  of  the  way  that 
future  evolution  is  to  take  would  be  an  inestima- 
ble benefit  to  us:  the  converse  of  this  is  equally 
worth  emphasizing.  A  false  conception  of  it  is 
a  matter  of  very  great,  though  it  may  be  tempo- 
rary, evil.  As  the  one  tends  to  the  achievement 
of  the  higher  life  that  is  to  be,  so  the  other  tends 
to  degeneration.  And  since  it  is  clear  that  the 
human  mind  has  reached  a  point  where  it  will 
not  let  this  subject  alone,  there  is  all  the  more 
need  that  we  bring  to  bear  upon  it  all  our  powers 
of  criticism  and  construction.  If  any  man  thinks 
he  sees  a  better  way  of  interpreting  the  indications 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         55 

that  point  to  a  higher  stage  of  the  great  process, 
he  should  give  it  to  the  reading  public  for  what  it 
is  worth. 

In  subsequent  chapters  I  shall  give  my  reasons 
for  setting  aside,  as  unsatisfactory,  the  attempts 
that  have  been  made  to  forecast  the  future  of 
evolution  in  the  line  of  corporate  developments, 
and  also  that  one  that  traces  it  in  the  line  of 
physical  heredity.  As  regards  corporate  develop- 
ments, whether  bodied  forth  in  dreams  of  a 
perfected  social  order  or  of  a  triumphant  Church, 
I  have  no  controversy  except  as  they  offer 
themselves  as  the  highest  outcome  in  sight,  — 
as  the  ultimate  object  of  inspiration  and  effort. 
That  the  social  organism  has  had  a  great  career 
and  is  destined  to  have  a  still  greater  one  cannot 
be  questioned,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the 
Church.  But  I  shall  try  to  show  that  both 
are  only  subsidiary,  instrumental,  passing  phases 
of  evolution,  and  that  the  highest  values  of  the 
process  must  be  sought  in  the  sphere  of  the 
individual;  in  short,  that  they  can  be  neither 
expressed  nor  realized  except  in  terms  of  per- 
sonality and  character. 

If  it  shall  appear  that  this  view  is  well 
founded,  if  in  the  course  of  our  argument  it 
shall  stand  approved  as  the  only  workable 
hypothesis,  the  whole  volume  of  evidence  as  re- 
gards the  continuation  of  the  great  process 
narrows  itself  down  to  some  most  important 
implications. 


56  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

IV 

The  first  of  these  to  which  I  will  call  attention 
has  reference  to  a  continuation  of  life  beyond  the 
grave  for  some  members  of  the  human  race.  If 
evolution  is  to  realize  itself  in  the  line  of  human 
personality,  such  a  continuance  is  a  necessary 
element  in  any  hypothetical  construction  of  the 
future.  It  is  impossible  to  think  the  facts  together 
otherwise. 

Could  we  accept  Nietzsche's  scheme  of  future 
evolution,  which  moves  on  the  line  of  physical 
heredity,  there  would  be  no  need  to  postulate 
such  a  continuance.  Formulated  in  accordance 
with  ideas  that  have  had  their  rise  in  the  lower 
stages  of  evolution,  this  hypothesis  culminates 
at  a  point  short  of  the  limits  already  reached. 
But  if,  in  accord  with  the  cumulative  experience 
of  the  ages,  we  discern  the  highest  reaches  of  the 
human  soul  in  those  qualities  that  have  always 
been  worshipped  as  the  highest,  both  within  the 
confines  of  Christianity  and  outside  of  it,  we  must 
trace  the  way  that  evolution  is  to  take  through 
and  beyond  the  barrier  that  the  dissolution  of  our 
physical  organs  has  erected  for  the  limitation 
of  our  thought. 

The  fact  that  experience  fails  to  throw  light 
upon  the  forms  or  conditions  of  the  life  beyond 
the  grave  is  no  reason  for  not  believing  in  its 
existence.  Evolution  is  full  of  transformations 
as  startling,  as  apparently  impossible,  from  the 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         57 

standpoint  of  all  that  has  preceded  them.  Science 
is  continually  forced  into  hypotheses  of  this  nature 
and  accepts  the  situation  in  the  faith  that  its 
constructions,  if  not  the  whole  truth,  are  in  the 
direction  of  truth.  In  the  light  of  what  we  know 
of  the  great  process,  the  belief  in  life  beyond  the 
grave  for  some  human  souls  presents  nothing  like 
so  great  difficulties  as  its  opposite;  that  is,  the 
belief  that  evolution  is  culminating  in  such  an 
unfinished,  inconsequent,  abortive  product  as 
mundane  man.  To  entertain  such  an  hypothesis 
makes  man  shrink  to  ignoble  proportions  and  the 
process  itself  appear  as  a  vast  and  tragic  blun- 
der. Reason,  experience,  science,  and  the  wis- 
dom of  common-sense  reject  it  as  an  unworkable 
hypothesis. 

A  second  inference  from  the  assumption  that 
evolution  must  find  its  realization  in  the  line  of 
personality  has  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
new  birth.  New  birth  is  the  commonplace  of 
evolution.  Life  at  each  of  its  various  stages 
reaches  a  point  beyond  which  there  is  no  further 
progress  except  on  condition  of  its  realization. 
"Ye  must  be  born  again"  is  over  the  portal  of 
every  avenue  to  the  next  higher  stage.  Appar- 
ently, until  man  is  reached,  the  continuation  of 
the  process  is  not  in  the  line  of  the  individual, 
but  in  that  of  the  genetic  order.  The  new  creature 
is  not  the  continuation  of  the  old.  The  old  type 
remains  at  the  lower  level  and  a  new  type  has 
somehow  emerged  from  it.  But  if,  in  accordance 


58  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

with  our  hypothesis,  the  new  birth  of  the  human 
era  takes  place  in  the  sphere  of  the  individual, 
we  may  see  in  it  the  actuality  of  that  transforma- 
tion that  is  affirmed  in  our  theology,  and  we  may 
not  only  look  forward  to  a  succession  of  new 
births,  but  find  ourselves  in  the  very  midst  of 
new-birth  realization;  those  which  we  know  be- 
ing but  the  earnest  of  those  which  are  yet  in 
the  undeveloped  future  of  the  process. 

These  two  doctrines,  that  of  life  beyond  the 
grave  and  that  of  the  new  birth,  march  together. 
The  great  significance  of  each  depends  upon  its 
union  with  the  other.  The  value  fades  from 
either  without  the  assurance  of  its  associate. 
Mere  continuance  of  existence  has  its  question- 
able, not  to  say  forbidding,  aspects.  Except 
there  be  the  prospect  of  a  persistently  improving 
life,  a  something  better  to  be  looked  forward  to 
with  successive  realizations  that  yet  never  exhaust 
possibilities,  the  thought  of  a  future  life  is  devoid 
of  inspiration;  and  moreover,  the  anticipation  of 
it  is  without  grounds. 

Now  let  us  observe  that  these  two  beliefs  are 
associated  in  several  quite  distinct  relations.  In 
the  first  place  they  are  the  two  which  evolution 
with  the  whole  volume  of  its  cumulative  evidence 
endorses.  In  the  second  place  they  are  the  two 
that  stand  out  as  the  distinctive  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  marking  its  advance  upon  the  older 
religion  from  which  it  was  derived.  In  the 
third  place  they  are  the  two  that  are  ordinarily 


GENERAL  ASPECTS  OF  EVOLUTION         59 

instanced  as  the  most  conspicuous  examples  of  a 
class  of  doctrines  not  given  in  human  experience, 
but  dependent  for  their  maintenance  upon  an 
external  revelation,  vouched  for  by  extraordinary 
events.  In  the  fourth  place  they  find  their 
unmistakable  counterparts  in  the  other  Oriental 
religions  that  competed  with  Christianity  for 
the  control  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Mithraism 
and  the  religion  of  Isis,  offshoots  respectively  of 
the  ancient  religions  of  Persia  and  Egypt,  made 
both  these  doctrines  prominent. 

Out  of  the  many  reflections  which  this  combi- 
nation of  circumstances  is  fitted  to  suggest  I  will 
call  attention  to  one  only;  namely,  its  bearing 
upon  the  relative  evidential  value  of  testimony 
derived,  on  the  one  hand,  from  alleged  extraor- 
dinary events  of  history  and,  on  the  other,  from 
the  main  trend  of  the  whole  course  of  history 
as  established  by  scientific  methods.  In  the  one 
case,  that  of  the  extraordinary  event,  or  events, 
the  advance  of  knowledge  and  thought  is  con- 
tinually confronting  us  with  new  difficulties, 
loosening  the  foundations  which  a  former  age 
found  secure  enough.  On  the  other  hand  we 
hold  those  vital  doctrines  with  ever-increasing 
strength  and  efficiency,  and  the  confidence, 
derived  from  progressive  endorsement,  inspires 
us  at  every  step. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE    PROCESS   AND    ITS   INTERPRETATION 

1OLOGY  has,  for  the  most  part,  ob- 
served a  studied  reticence  with  regard  to 
evolution.  When  the  necessity  of  frankly 
facing  our  relations  to  it  has  been  urged,  the  cus- 
tomary rejoinder  has  been:  —  We  are  not  in  a 
position  to  come  to  definite  terms  with  this  great 
generalization  of  science,  because  we  do  not  yet 
know  what  it  is;  no  satisfactory  explanation 
of  it  has  yet  been  given,  and  it  will  be  soon 
enough  to  adjust  our  inherited  beliefs  to  it 
when  such  explanations  have  been  reached. 

In  opposition  to  this  attitude,  I  will  venture  to 
affirm  that  we  know  more  about  evolution  than 
we  do  about  most  of  the  generalizations  with 
which  we  have  to  deal,  far  more  than  we  do  about 
the  nebulous  realms  of  infinity  in  which  theo- 
logians of  an  earlier  day  found  themselves  so 
much  at  home.  We  know  more  about  it,  because 
it  deals  with  real  things,  actualities  that  can  be 
tested  and  verified,  and  because  it  is  the  result 
of  an  immense  amount  of  patient,  persistent 
investigation.  That  we  cannot  know  everything 
about  it,  is  no  excuse  for  not  knowing  all  that  it 

60 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     61 

is  possible  to  know.  Since  it  has  come  to  stay 
and  dominate  our  thought,  our  knowledge  of  it 
should  be  as  clearly  defined  as  the  nature  of  the 
case  admits. 


A  first  and  most  important  step  toward  the 
understanding  of  the  relations  of  evolution  to 
theology  is  to  clearly  discriminate  between  the 
process  itself  and  its  interpretation.  Darwinism 
is  not  evolution.  Spencerism  is  not  evolution. 
Each  is,  in  its  way,  a  luminous  illustration  of  it, 
accompanied  by  and  interwoven  with  an  inter- 
pretation. This  has  been  the  cause  of  great 
misapprehension  and  confusion  with  regard  to 
the  doctrine  itself,  so  that  the  separation  of  the 
two  must  be  our  first  task. 

What  then  is  evolution?  It  is,  in  its  simplest 
statement,  the  process  by  which  all  things  have 
come  to  be  what  they  are.  As  a  doctrine  it  was 
originally  suggested  by,  and  is  primarily  derived 
from  analogy.*  It  does  not  admit  of  demonstra- 
tion other  than  that  of  the  practical  sort.  It 
appeals  to  the  intellectual  judgment  of  men  by 
the  concurrence  of  several  lines  of  testimony 
emanating  from  different  sources.  The  original 
statement  of  the  doctrine,  as  an  inference  derived 
analogically  from  a  comparison  of  three  series  of 

*  The  extent  of  this  indebtedness  to  analogy,  and  the  parallel 
which  it  presents  to  the  derivation  of  the  doctrine  of  God,  is  dis- 
cussed in  Appendix  A. 


62  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

organic  forms,  called  the  taxonomic,  the  phylo- 
genetic,  and  the  ontogenetic,  was  the  apparent  con- 
tradiction of  a  number  of  stubborn  facts  with 
which  the  world  had  long  been  familiar  and  re- 
garded as  ultimate.  Prominent  among  these  was 
the  separation  of  contemporary  species  by  impas- 
sable clefts  in  the  continuity  of  animal  life.  The 
first  and  great  work  of  the  advocates  of  the  doc- 
trine was  to  remove  if  possible  what  seemed  to 
be  a  fatal  objection  to  it.  This  work  was  pur- 
sued with  patience  and  skill  in  different  depart- 
ments of  science,  each  one  bringing  some  valuable 
contribution  to  it.  The  discovery  of  interme- 
diate forms,  hitherto  unsuspected,  the  existence 
of  rudimentary  organs  in  the  higher  animals,  the 
close  resemblance  of  the  successive  embryonic 
stages  of  a  complex  organism  to  the  adult  forms 
of  lower  orders  —  these  and  other  evidences,  con- 
tributed by  the  sober,  plodding  work  of  research, 
constituted  the  distinctly  scientific  business  of 
evolution. 

But  in  the  course  of  this  a  number  of  well- 
defined  questions  emerged  which  were  answered 
in  different  ways  by  different  scientists.  Some 
of  these  are  as  follows.  First,  Are  the  changes 
which  lead  from  one  species  to  another  always 
gradual,  or  is  evolution  characterized  by  dis- 
tinctly new  departures  of  great  significance? 
Second,  Are  the  most  efficient  factors  in  the  process 
those  working  from  within  the  organism  or  those 
which  influence  and  shape  it  from  the  outside? 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     63 

Third,  Does  intelligence  play  any  part  in  the 
process?  And  if  so,  is  it  that  of  the  creature 
alone,  or  must  we  assume  also  the  working  of  a 
higher  wisdom,  an  indwelling  and  directing  power, 
that  has  shaped  the  process  from  the  beginning? 

These  three  questions,  though  closely  connected 
with  the  main  scientific  issue,  must  be  sharply 
distinguished  from  it.  They  were  concerned 
with  science  only  at  second  hand,  they  were 
very  largely  speculative,  they  had  to  do  with 
causes  and  origins.  They  gave  rise  to  very  diver- 
gent hypotheses,  none  of  which  could  be  sub- 
stantiated nor,  on  the  other  hand,  disproved  by 
scientific  methods.  Each  was,  in  its  way,  an 
attempted  explanation,  in  whole  or  in  part,  of 
the  doctrine  which  was  now  assumed  to  be  true. 
And  it  is  here  that  theology  and  the  extreme  school 
of  science  join  issue. 

Now,  because  the  controversies  to  which  these 
questions  have  given  rise  are  mainly  speculative, 
shall  we  say  they  are  of  small  importance,  — 
battles  in  the  air,  questions  that  can  never  be 
satisfactorily  answered,  and  therefore  unprofit- 
able? In  opposition  to  such  a  view  I  will  venture 
to  affirm  that  these  questions  constitute  the  most 
vitally  important,  the  most  practically  valuable 
fruits  of  evolution.  And  further,  that  far  from 
being  unanswerable  questions,  they  admit  of 
solutions  in  which  the  mind  of  the  average  man 
as  well  as  that  of  the  most  highly  trained  can  find 
satisfaction  and  power.  In  justification  of  this 


64  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

position  I  will  premise,  first,  that  our  ordinary 
idea  of  science,  the  one  which  we  have  hitherto 
admitted,  is  far  too  limited. 

Science  is  grounded  upon  facts  carefully  sifted 
and  rigorously  interpreted,  but  this  is  not  the  whole 
of  it.  This  is  only  its  basement,  above  which 
there  are  upper  stories  to  which  we  may  climb  by 
the  stairways  of  analogy, —  stairways  that  we  have 
to  construct  for  ourselves  and  which  must  be  most 
carefully  built  to  enable  us  to  reach  the  higher 
levels  from  which  we  can  sweep  wider  horizons  and 
elaborate  larger  plans  for  the  conduct  of  life . 

Does  this  sound  visionary?  It  well  may,  for 
what  is  more  misleading  than  analogy?  Does  it 
not  lure  us  into  all  sorts  of  blind  alleys  and  leave 
us  to  find  our  way  out  as  best  we  can?  Does  it 
not  encourage  us  to  attempt  stairways  where  the 
feet  stumble  as  they  seek  to  climb?  It  surely  is 
so.  There  are  analogies  and  analogies.  Some  of 
them  are,  to  change  the  figure,  the  most  shifty, 
inconsequent,  misleading  guides.  Some  of  them 
are  horribly  tyrannical  when  they  get  the  upper 
hand  of  us.  They  hoodwink  and  deceive  us;  they 
hypnotize  us  into  seeing  things  with  their  eyes, 
all  the  while  believing  that  we  are  seeing  them 
with  our  own.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are 
analogies  that  are  to  be  trusted.  These  are  the 
only  guides  beyond  immediate  experience;  we 
never  get  anywhere  without  them.  We  are  so 
used  to  depending  upon  them  that  we  follow 
them  for  the  most  part  unconsciously. 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     65 

To  return  now  to  the  various  and  divergent 
explanations  of  the  causes  of  evolution;  let  us 
observe  that  each  one  of  these,  the  lame,  the 
halt,  and  the  blind,  as  well  as  those  that  move 
with  a  good  degree  of  success  toward  the  mark, 
is  under  the  guidance  and  dominating  influence 
of  some  analogy.  In  what  follows  I  shall  try  to 
show  how  it  is  possible  to  discriminate  between 
the  reliable  and  the  unreliable,  the  true  and  the 
false,  in  the  use  of  the  analogical  method. 

The  chief  source  of  error  in  the  employment  of 
analogy  is  to  be  found  in  the  choice  of  the  analogue 
from  which  it  takes  its  departure.  Our  most  mis- 
leading analogies  are  so  because  they  are  produced 
from  a  fragment  of  reality  instead  of  from  the 
largest,  most  comprehensive  whole  that  we  have 
hitherto  conceived.  The  analogy  that  is  derived 
from  such  an  abstracted  fragment  of  knowledge 
may  be  very  satisfying  to  a  mind  that  concen- 
trates its  attention  upon  this  one  aspect  of  reality 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  else.  But  as  soon  as  this 
mind  returns  from  the  isolation  of  the  depart- 
mental view  to  the  concrete,  many-sided  world  of 
experience,  the  satisfaction  somehow  evaporates 
from  its  constructions. 

In  our  ordinary  conception  of  the  world  we 
carry  with  us  a  dualistic  thought  of  it.  It  is  made 
up,  we  say,  of  mind  and  matter.  There  are 
physical,  mechanical  forces,  there  are  psychical, 
spiritual  forces.  This  discrimination  of  two  de- 
partments serves  us  both  in  the  practical  affairs 
5 


66  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  life  and  also  in  the  pursuit  of  scientific  research. 
For  successful  results  in  the  investigation  of 
natural,  that  is  to  say,  physical  causes,  we  must 
isolate  these  from  all  those  influences  which  we 
call  psychical,  just  as  in  studying  a  machine  for 
the  understanding  of  the  bearing  of  its  different 
parts  on  each  other  we  shut  out  from  our  con- 
sciousness all  reference  to  the  relations  which  it 
sustains  to  the  mind  that  made  it,  or  to  the  intel- 
ligence that  runs  it,  or  to  the  electricity,  or  steam, 
that  supplies  it  with  energy.  But,  this  isolation 
is  only  provisional,  it  stands  for  no  independent 
reality.  The  machine  or,  on  a  larger  scale,  the 
vast  aggregate  of  physical  forces  that  make  up 
the  world  of  instrumentality  are,  in  themselves 
considered,  only  fragments,  aspects  of  greater 
concrete  wholes  that  must  be  taken  into  account 
before  we  can  begin  to  understand  their  signifi- 
cance. 

The  book  which  I  hold  in  my  hand  is,  from  one 
point  of  view,  a  thing  complete  in  itself.  But 
in  another  and  much  more  important  sense  it  is 
not  a  book  at  all;  it  is  a  combination  of  paper, 
binding,  and  printed  characters.  The  real  book 
is  a  purely  psychical  thing,  a  message  conveyed 
from  one  mind  to  another.  This  seems  almost 
too  simple  to  be  worth  writing  about.  But  it  is 
in  default  of  recognizing  just  this  simple  truth 
that  some  of  the  greatest  controversies  have 
arisen. 

The  conception  of  the  world  as  purely  spiritual 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     67 

is  without  foundation  in  fact;  the  conception  of 
it  as  purely  mechanical  is  equally  so.  In  both 
cases  it  rests  upon  a  deceptive  analogy  produced 
from  a  fractional  representation  of  reality,  and 
therefore  no  reality  in  itself.  The  traditional  con- 
cept of  the  world  as  the  direct  outcome  of  pure 
thought  and  will,  without  the  intervention  of  in- 
strumentalities, had  no  real  experience  to  rest 
upon.  It  was  the  experimentally  formed  idea  of 
creation,  with  the  indispensable  conditions  of  that 
experience  shorn  off  from  it.  It  was  a  dream, 
a  fancy  emanating  in  fairyland.  It  held  men 
through  their  imaginations,  but  when  it  came 
into  vigorous  contact  with  realistic  thought,  it 
faded  out  of  sight. 

But,  let  us  observe,  the  conception  of  a  world 
created  by  purely  mechanical  forces,  without 
mind,  is  not  only  equally  false,  but  much  more 
difficult  of  assimilation,  because  the  whole  idea 
of  efficient  cause  had  its  origin  in  the  self-con- 
scious action  of  intelligence  and  will.  But  here 
the  initial  factor  in  the  process  has  been  dropped. 
A  world  emanating  from  pure  mechanism  is  not 
simply  fanciful,  it  is  monstrous. 

How  then  shall  we  reach  any  trustworthy  con- 
ception of  the  truth  with  regard  to  creation?  How 
shall  we  get  these  two  divergent  aspects  together? 
Shall  we  say  that  they  are  only  the  two  faces  of 
one  ultimate,  underlying  reality  that  is  unknown 
to  us  except  through  these  opposites?  To  say 
this  is  only  to  obscure  thought  with  words.  Each 


68  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

side  in  the  controversy,  if  it  takes  refuge  in  such 
a  formula,  sees  its  side  as  the  reality  and  the  other 
as  the  illusive  appearance.  There  is  another  way, 
the  simple  common-sense  way  of  retracing  our 
steps  to  the  point  from  whence  these  divergent 
aspects  of  the  real  took  their  rise,  and  by  study- 
ing them  both  together  in  then*  actual,  concrete 
relations  to  each  other. 

The  mechanical  interpretation  of  the  world  and 
of  evolution  has  taken  its  rise  in  man-made 
machinery.  Every  mechanical  contrivance,  before 
it  existed  as  a  thing  separate  from  its  inventor, 
existed  in  a  different  form  in  his  cerebrum.  It 
was  originally  an  organization  of  nerve-cells  in 
his  brain,  and  it  was  organized  there  by  mind. 
Mind  is  its  vital  principle.  Separated  from  that 
vital  principle  it  is  a  dead  thing  which  cannot 
explain  itself,  much  less  the  universe.  How  can 
we  wonder  that  a  universe  interpreted  by  such  a 
mutilation  should  be  found  destitute  of  mind? 
Necessarily,  the  power  that  moves  it  is  declared 
to  be  unknowable,  and  that,  manifestly  and 
wholly,  because  the  well-known  cause  and  originat- 
ing principle  of  mechanism  was  subtracted  from  it 
before  its  application  to  the  greatest  of  analogical 
undertakings. 

When  we  give  ourselves  to  the  investigation  of  a 
man-made  machine,  we  find  it  absolutely  complete 
hi  itself.  The  world  of  organized  physical  forces 
can,  as  we  have  said,  also  be  studied  in  separation 
from  the  thought  of  mind.  In  fact  it  must  be  so 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     69 

studied  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  ends  of  phys- 
ical science.  And  for  this  purpose  the  employment 
of  the  concept  is  not  only  justifiable  but  most 
useful.  But  when,  rising  to  a  higher  point  of 
view,  we  seek  a  concept  that  shall  *be  inclusive  of 
those  two  great  realms  of  reality  that  stand  apart 
from  each  other  in  our  analytical  thought,  our 
only  chance  of  success  lies  in  restoring  to  the  con- 
cept mechanism  the  other  vital  half  of  reality 
that  we  have  temporarily  neglected.  When  we 
have  grasped  these  two  halves  of  reality  in  one 
concept,  as  in  our  thought  of  personality  we  unite 
soul  and  body,  we  have  a  mechanical  universe 
that  is  instinct  with  mind:  not  a  machine  that 
has  emerged  out  of  the  absolutely  unknown,  self- 
sufficing  and  self-adjusting,  but  a  mechanism  alive 
with  the  thought  and  potency  of  its  originator. 
It  is  an  established  order  of  things  displaying 
great  uniformity  of  action,  but  it  is  also  a  moving, 
growing  order. 

We  could  not  have  a  better  illustration  and 
verification  of  the  truth  of  the  above  principle 
than  that  afforded  by  the  history  of  the  efforts  to 
explain  evolution  without  the  recognition  of  an 
indwelling  mind.  They  have  failed  most  signally 
both  from  the  side  of  biology  and  from  the  side 
of  physics.  During  the  last  half  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  pan-mechanical  view  of  the 
world  scored  its  greatest  triumphs,  and  also,  quite 
aside  from  the  considerations  above  advanced, 
worked  out  its  own  discomfiture. 


70  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

I  will  endeavour  to  show,  in  as  few  words  as 
possible,  how  this  came  to  pass.  In  physics  it 
was  the  direct  result  of  an  apparent  demonstra- 
tion of  the  thesis  that  man's  belief  in  his  own 
mind  as  the  efficient  cause  of  anything  is  a  de- 
lusion. The  course  of  reasoning  was  something  as 
follows.  The  multiplicity  of  forces  in  the  midst 
of  which  we  live,  —  motion,  heat,  light,  electricity, 
chemical  affinity,  etc.,  —  though  they  seem  to  us 
to  have  no  community  of  nature,  are,  in  fact, 
different  forms  of  one  persistent  power.  They 
have  been  demonstrated  to  be  different  modes  of 
motion  that  are  all  convertible  into  each  other. 
And  further,  those  other  forms  of  energy  that  we 
call  sensation,  emotion,  thought,  will,  are,  in  no 
wise,  of  a  different  nature;  they  also  are  trans- 
formable into  the  above-mentioned  modes  of 
motion.  Now,  add  to  this  the  consideration  that 
the  physical  power  of  the  universe  never  suffers 
diminution  or  increase,  and  we  have  before  us  the 
data  upon  which  the  argument  for  the  exclusion 
of  mental  causation  from  the  world  of  real  things 
is  based.  It  is  said  to  be  demonstrated  that 
mental  phenomena  cannot  be  a  result  outside  the 
physical  chain,  because,  if  any  portion  of  the 
stream  of  energy  were  diverted  from  its  course 
for  the  production  of  mind,  that  portion  would 
disappear  and  the  physical  consequents  would 
cease  to  be  the  equivalents  of  their  physical 
antecedents. 

Thus  it  was  made  to  appear  that  science  ne- 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     71 

cessitates  the  banishment  from  the  universe  of 
all  such  concepts  as  that  of  mental  causation. 
Herbert  Spencer  did  not  hesitate  to  adopt  this 
conclusion  and  Professor  Huxley  had  no  reserves 
with  regard  to  it.  He  declared  that  conscious- 
ness had  absolutely  no  power  of  modifying  events. 
"We  are,"  he  says,  "conscious  automata,  .  .  . 
parts  of  the  great  series  of  cause  and  effect  which, 
in  unbroken  continuity,  compose  that  which  is  and 
has  been  and  shall  be."*  And  again:  "Any  one 
who  is  acquainted  with  the  history  of  science  will 
admit  that  its  progress  in  all  ages,  meant  and,  now 
more  than  ever,  means,  the  extension  of  what  we 
call  matter  and  causation,  and  the  concomitant 
banishment  from  all  regions  of  human  thought  of 
what  we  call  spirit  and  spontaneity,  "f 

Now,  so  long  as  the  denial  of  spiritual  influences 
concerned  itself  with  such  matters  as  the  invasion 
of  the  order  of  nature  by  miraculous  interpositions, 
or  the  belief  in  specific  answers  to  prayer,  — 
matters  lying  quite  outside  the  sphere  of  verifica- 
tion through  unquestioned  experiences,  —  it  did 
not  accomplish  its  own  undoing.  Men  deferred 
to  it  provisionally.  Many  were  ready  to  sur- 
render the  most  vital  of  their  religious  beliefs  to 
it.  But  when  the  ever-widening  generalizations 
of  science,  with  their  categorical  inclusions  and 
exclusions,  brought  physicists  to  the  above  ulti- 
matum, the  vision  of  an  unmodifiable  order  faded 

*  "Science  and  Culture,"  pp.  243  and  246. 
t  "The  Fortnightly  Review,"  February,  1869. 


72  .  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

out  of  sight.  The  limit  had  been  reached  sud- 
denly, and  the  argument,  so  to  speak,  broke  its 
neck. 

For,  when  the  assumption  of  the  sufficiency  and 
all-inclusiveness  of  physical  causation  came  to 
abut  upon  personal  experience,  it  was  seen  to  be 
the  flat  contradiction  of  the  fundamental  realities 
of  life.  Every  one  of  us  is  daily  living  the  nega- 
tion of  that  which  this  assumption  affirms.  Our 
activities  as  related  both  to  things  and  to  people 
are  the  practical,  indefeasible  demonstration  of 
the  proposition  that  efficiency,  direction  of  energy 
toward  definite  ends,  purposive  modifications  of 
every  kind,  have  their  rise,  not  in  mechanism,  but 
in  mind,  —  in  that  very  department  of  reality 
that  the  physicists  declare  to  be  non-existant. 
What  we  are  obliged  to  live,  that  we  must  neces- 
sarily believe.  From  the  standpoint  of  physics 
or,  for  that  matter,  from  any  standpoint,  it  is  im- 
possible for  us  to  explain  how  mind  gets  its  hold 
upon  and  uses  its  instrumentalities,  how  it  ever 
invents  and  controls  a  machine.  But  in  our  actual 
experience  we  know  that  it  does  do  it. 

Thus,  simply  by  production  to  its  ultimate  and 
necessary  conclusions,  the  mechanical  theory 
settled  itself,  and  great  was  the  relief  to  sane 
thinking.  It  was  as  when  a  man  is  held  in  the 
grip  of  a  paralysing  nightmare.  He  tries  to 
speak,  but  something  prevents;  he  tries  to  move, 
but  there  is  no  response  to  his  will.  The  agony 
increases  till  the  point  of  greatest  tension  is 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     73 

reached;  then,  as  by  a  supreme  shock,  the  spell 
is  broken.  The  sleeper  awakes  and  assures  him- 
self that  he  is  a  free  man. 

But,  thus  far,  the  world  of  speculative  thought 
is  no  more  than  half-awake  to  the  importance  of 
its  emancipation.  It  is,  to  theology,  a  restoration 
of  liberty  after  a  depressing  period  of  servitude; 
but  the  habit  of  servitude  still  remains.  The 
deadening  influence  of  determinism  lingers,  and 
the  echoes  of  its  paralysing  dicta  reach  us  as  if 
no  revolution  in  thought  had  taken  place.  The 
impossibility  of  answers  to  prayer  in  a  world 
governed  by  law  is  sometimes  affirmed  and  some- 
times hesitatingly  admitted  by  those  who  ought, 
by  this  time,  to  know  better. 

The  breaking  of  the  spell  assures  man  that  the 
order  of  nature  can  be  and  constantly  is  modified 
through  his  initiative;  and  inseparably  linked 
with  this,  is  the  assurance  that  the  God  of  all  the 
earth  can  do  as  much,  —  that  the  order  of  nature 
can  be  modified  by  a  supreme  mind  in  touch  with 
it.  If  we  go  on  believing  that  our  requests,  our 
prayers  to  our  fellowmen  can  be  answered  by  re- 
sponsive acts  on  their  part,  there  is  no  reason, 
scientific  or  otherwise,  against  the  belief  that  a 
higher  intelligence  may  be  influenced  to  aid  us  in 
the  attainment  of  our  desires  and  legitimate  am- 
bitions. As  in  the  one  case  so  in  the  other,  the 
so-called  scientific  impossibility  of  modifying  the 
routine  order  of  nature  by  intelligence  and  will 
has  vanished. 


74  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

II 

The  story  of  the  struggles  of  the  pan-mechanical 
explanation  of  evolution  in  the  department  of 
biology,  though  more  restricted,  is  in  some  respects 
more  interesting  than  that  of  its  fate  in  the  sphere 
of  physics.  For  here  we  see  men,  eminent  for 
their  understanding  of  the  ways  of  nature,  exer- 
cising all  their  inventive  powers  to  think  into  the 
process  of  evolution  some  kind  of  a  mechanical 
substitute  for  mind.  It  was  not  that  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  process  itself  suggested  a  mechani- 
cal solution.  For  when,  with  the  incoming  of 
evolution,  the  vision  of  a  world  of  routine,  run- 
ning its  everlasting  mechanical  round  without 
change,  had  become  transformed  into  that  of  a 
world  of  constantly  new  beginnings  and  new 
departures,  in  the  interests  of  an  ever-increasing 
organization,  the  familiar  analogies  of  experience 
suggested,  nay,  even  seemed  to  necessitate,  the 
recognition  of  a  designing  intelligence  directing 
to  some  extent  the  play  of  natural  forces.  But 
to  all  such  suggestions  a  deaf  ear  was  turned  at 
the  behest  of  the  grand,  all-embracing  mechanical 
theory.  They  embodied  an  easy,  popular  mode 
of  interpretation,  but,  they  must  be  popular  delu- 
sions. They  were  not  scientific. 

Darwin  made  a  marvellously  elaborate  and  bril- 
liant attempt  toward  the  solution  of  the  difficulty, 
but  it  was  not  a  success.  Science  was  quick  to 
rn  its  deficiencies.  On  every  side  there  sprang 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     75 

up  those  who  recognized  the  fact  that  Darwin  had 
told  but  one  side  of  the  story.  It  was  clear  that, 
while  his  whole  thought  and  enthusiasm  had  been 
devoted  to  tracing  the  influence  of  the  external 
factors  of  the  process,  the  all-important  agency 
of  the  internal  factors  had  been  minimized  almost 
to  the  vanishing  point.  The  protest  against  this 
one-sided  view  took  a  variety  of  forms  among 
those  who  were  as  anxious  as  Darwin  himself  to 
explain  the  process  without  the  recognition  of  a 
separate  guiding  intelligence. 

All  those  processes  of  the  physical  world  such 
as  chemical  affinity,  organic  affinity,  crystaliza- 
tion,  etc.,  were  exploited.  But  the  sought-for 
factor,  which  could  take  the  place  of  intelligence, 
proved  to  be  always  just  out  of  reach.  Then 
there  came  a  weakening,  a  disposition  to  admit 
assistance  from  the  forbidden  realm  of  psychical 
causation  —  a  movement  that  was  quickly  ex- 
posed by  others  who  were  equally  hard  pressed 
for  a  principle  that  would  work. 

Thus  Nageli  assumed  the  existence  in  nature  of 
"a  law  of  improvement."  According  to  this  law, 
internal  causes  work  continually  toward  a  greater 
complexity  and  greater  perfection  of  organization. 
He  guards  this  announcement  with  the  assurance 
that  his  principle  is  a  purely  mechanical  one,  and 
that  it  is  the  law  of  the  persistence  of  motion  in 
the  field  of  organic  evolution.  But  of  this  same 
principle  Eimer,  who  holds  as  well  as  Nageli  to 
the  determining  influence  of  mechanical  factors, 


76  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

says,  "Although  he  explains  it  as  a  mechanico- 
physiological  principle,  I  hold  it  to  be  a  kind  of 
striving  toward  a  goal  or  teleology,  in  face  of  which 
a  directing  power  conceived  as  personal,  existing 
outside  material  nature  and  ruling  all  things, 
would  seem  to  me  fully  justified."* 

This  unavoidable  attraction,  this  compulsion 
as  by  a  necessity  of  the  human  mind  toward  the 
one  analogy  that  can  explain  evolution,  is  still 
more  interestingly  illustrated  by  that  class  of 
theorists  who  so  far  surrendered  to  the  demand 
for  intelligent  guidance  as  to  avail  themselves  of 
it  in  a  modified  form.  These  assume  that  what 
we  behold  in  organic  evolution  cannot  be  explained 
without  intelligence  or  consciousness,  but  that 
there  is  no  need  of  postulating  a  superior  being  as 
the  source  of  such  intelligence,  since  the  creature  is 
sufficient  unto  itself.  In  this  there  was  a  swinging 
back  to  the  conception  of  Lamarck  given  to  the 
world  a  century  before  the  "  Origin  of  Species/' 
It  was  outlined  by  Charles  Darwin's  grandfather 
in  the  following  terms:  "What  we  call  creatures 
were  not  created  by  God,  for  there  is  no  such  being 
as  we  imagine  by  that  name,  but  by  themselves, 
that  is,  by  the  process  of  evolution." 

The  difficulty  of  reaching  satisfactory  results, 
with  the  very  small  outfit  of  intelligence  which 
we  may  attribute  to  animals,  is  manifest.  The 
wonders  of  instinct  and  progressive  organization 
demand  for  their  explanation  an  intelligence,  not 

*  Organic  Evolution,  p.  53. 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     77 

of  a  lower  quality  than  that  of  man,  but  one  of  a 
vastly  higher  quality.  To  get  round  this  diffi- 
culty an  intelligence  different  in  kind  was  postu- 
lated. And  if  different  in  kind  it  might,  it  was 
imagined,  be  made  to  cover  all  the  requirements 
of  the  situation.  Thus  Mr.  J.  J.  Murphy  gave  us 
" unconscious  intelligence,"  and  Dr.  Cope  gave 
us  "consciousness  and  memory,"  but  without 
intelligence.  Of  this  latter  Dr.  Cope  says,  "We 
are  led  to  the  conclusion  that  evolution  is  an 
outgrowth  of  mind  and  that  mind  is  the  parent 
of  all  living  forms."  But,  he  explains,  "by 
mind,  as  the  author  of  the  organic  world,  I 
mean  only  the  two  elements,  consciousness  and 
memory."* 

Why,  common-sense  asks,  should  these  two 
distinguished  investigators  and  theorists  set  aside 
the  whole  and  satisfactory  analogy  of  a  conscious 
intelligence  residing  in  nature  to  make  use  of  that 
same  analogy  in  a  mutilated  form?  How  does 
the  mutilation  help  them?  In  no  way,  except 
that  by  it  they  get  the  service  of  the  concept 
intelligence  without  committing  themselves  to  the 
implications  of  it.  In  a  single  phrase  they  com- 
bine the  affirmation  and  the  denial  of  the  factor 
which  is  the  mainspring  of  their  explanation  of 
the  animated  world.  They  get  the  use  of  an 
intelligence  that  is  not  intelligence,  of  conscious- 
ness that  is  not  consciousness.  That  this  is 
simply  conjuring  with  a  contradiction  of  terms,  a 

*  Origin  of  the  Fittest,  p.  230. 


78  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

mere  juggling  with  words,  is  made  evident  by  the 
fact  that  the  formula  reads  just  as  well  one  way 
as  the  other.  Unintelligent  consciousness  works 
the  same  wonders  for  Dr.  Cope  that  unconscious 
intelligence  works  for  Mr.  Murphy. 

Another  exploitation  of  this  idea  of  unconscious 
intelligence  gained  at  one  time  a  large  following 
for  the  philosophy  of  Edouard  von  Hartmann. 
This  raised  the  efficiency  so  described  from  the 
realm  of  the  lower  animals  to  that  of  an  all-com- 
prehensive principle.  It  was  said  to  be  an  all- 
pervading  and  universally  working  constructive 
wisdom,  a  foreseeing,  purposive  intelligence  in- 
forming the  whole  process.  A  most  elaborate 
and  effective  array  of  the  facts  necessitating  the 
belief  in  such  an  indwelling  principle  is  fur- 
nished, and  this  stands  quite  apart  from  the 
assumption  that  is  attached  to  it;  namely,  the 
assumption  that  this  wisdom  of  the  All-one  is 
unconscious.  It  is,  in  fact,  theism  metamor- 
phosed into  pantheism  by  the  affirmation  of  its 
unconsciousness. 

Here  again,  common-sense  asks,  Why  is  it  neces^ 
sary  or  reasonable  to  mutilate  the  analogy  by  which 
alone  man  can  reach  a  satisfactory  explanation  of 
the  world?  It  is,  in  fact,  neither  necessary  nor 
reasonable.  It  is  not  the  former,  because  all  the 
facts  of  the  world  are  more  truly  explained  without 
the  mutilation.  It  is  not  the  latter,  because  the 
very  same  arguments  that  prove  the  necessity  of 
postulating  the  existence  of  an  indwelling  wisdom 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     79 

oblige  us,  if  we  admit  their  soundness,  to  assume 
that  this  same  indwelling  wisdom  is  conscious.* 

By  an  irresistible  compulsion  the  human  mind, 
after  all  its  circling  round,  comes  back  to  the 
analogy  of  concrete  mind  as  the  one  and  only 
vehicle  by  which  it  can  reach  a  satisfactory  con- 
ception of  the  universe.  All  its  attempts  to 
pierce  the  empyrean  of  thought  by  the  use  of 
abstractions  have  proved  as  abortive  as  trying  to 
fly  with  one  wing.  And  for  the  clearing  away  of 
the  mists  which  hung  over  this  controversy  we  are 
deeply  indebted  to  the  thoroughness  with  which 
the  biologists  as  well  as  the  physicists,  who 
advocated  the  opposite  view,  have  pressed 
their  claims  to  ultimate  conclusions.  But  this 
is  very  far  from  being  the  full  statement  of  our 
indebtedness. 

The  same  thoroughness  of  discussion  that 
established  the  necessity  of  recognizing  an  intel- 
ligent Creator  has,  at  the  same  time,  increasingly 
revealed  and  illustrated  the  relations  which  He 
sustains  to  His  creature  world.  Its  intimate 
cstudy  of  purposive  action  in  the  animals  lower 
on  the  scale  of  development  than  man,  has 
brought  before  us  aspects  of  nature  that  pro- 
foundly affect  our  thought  of  God.  For  the 
farther  we  carry  research  in  this  direction,  the 
more  we  are  impressed  with  the  evidences  of 
an  intelligence  and  foresight  in  actions  of  the 

*  A  psychological  theory  of  evolution  by  a  more  recent  writer 
is  considered  in  Appendix  B. 


80  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

lower  orders  of  creation  which  cannot  possibly  be 
their  intelligence. 

The  whole  of  that  great  class  of  instincts  that 
cannot  be  attributed  to  "  lapsed-intelligence "  or 
habit,  all  those  new  departures  in  progressive 
organization  which  declare  themselves  along  the 
course  of  evolution,  all  the  forms  that  show  struc- 
ture in  anticipation  of  function — these  as  well  as 
the  phenomena  of  human  consciousness,  emphasize 
the  fact  of  a  higher  intelligence  working  with 
that  of  the  creature  and  leading  its  activities  to 
ends  of  which  it  could  never  have  dreamed.  In 
other  words,  evolution  discloses  a  world  called  into 
being,  not  only  by  a  gradual,  but  also  by  a  co- 
operative process.  Lamarck's  idea  of  the  great 
movement  was  half  true.  Creatures  do  make 
themselves.  But  the  ampler  truth  is  stated  by 
Charles  Kingsley  when  he  says,  "We  see  in  evo- 
lution God  making  things  make  themeslves." 
And  if  I  mistake  not,  it  is  out  of  this  conception, 
as  a  living  root,  that  the  purest  and  most  inde- 
structible form  of  religion  is  destined  to  grow. 

Wide  as  is  the  interval  which  separates  man 
from  the  orders  below  him,  great  as  is  the  con- 
trast between  his  consciousness  and  theirs,  there 
is,  in  respect  of  co-operative  creation,  an  unbroken 
continuity.  A  principle  of  associated  working 
characterizes  the  whole  process  and  reveals  to  us 
more  clearly  than  any  other  the  meaning  and 
scope  of  it  all.  The  doctrine  of  which  we  have 
heard  so  much  of  late,  the  immanence  of  God, 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     81 

seems,  as  an  applied  generalization,  perilously 
near  to  pantheism,  but  studied  and  illustrated  by 
the  facts  of  evolution,  it  becomes  the  vital  doctrine 
of  a  real  theology. 

Darwin  somewhere  says  that  he  found  himself 
at  times  powerfully  impelled  to  recognize  the 
agency  of  an  intelligent  mind  in  the  wonderful 
adaptations  of  nature,  but  was  deterred  from 
yielding  to  this  because  he  could  not  believe  that 
some  things  were  designed  and  others  not.  But 
such  a  difficulty  disappears  in  the  light  of  our 
analogy.  If  we  trust  ourselves  unreservedly  to 
our  human  experience  for  the  interpretation  of 
God's  working  in  His  world,  the  appearance  of 
design  in  some  relations  and  its  absence  in  others 
is  not  only  not  surprising,  but  just  the  combina- 
tion we  should  expect  to  find.  The  great  volume 
of  our  activity,  physical  and  mental,  expresses 
itself  in  routine  action,  —  the  almost  unconscious 
repetition  of  habit  in  response  to  an  approxi- 
mately uniform  environment.  But  this  is  con- 
tinually varied  by  departures,  on  this  side  and 
on  that,  occasioned  by  the  necessity  of  ad- 
justing ourselves  to  a  changed  environment 
or  for  the  attainment  of  some  end  not,  hitherto, 
contemplated.  Both  kinds  of  activity  are  nec- 
essary, the  one  for  stability,  and  self-preserva- 
tion, the  other  for  growth  and  rise  in  the  scale 
of  being. 

This  is  just  what  we  find  in  evolution  —  a  per- 
sistent substratum  of  uniformity,  varied  by  con- 
6 


82  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

tinually  new  departures.  Nor  do  these  new 
departures  involve  a  break  in  the  method.  There 
is  perfect  continuity,  but  from  the  standpoint  of 
a  wider  principle.  As  we  ascend  the  scale  of  being, 
such  qualities  as  consciousness,  foresight,  responsi- 
bility, increase.  There  is  more  and  more  liberty, 
a  constantly  wider  field  granted  to  the  creature, 
until,  in  man,  we  come  to  a  being  who  is  able  to 
construct  an  ideal  future  and  direct  the  stream 
of  his  vitality  to  the  attainment  of  it.  But  the 
method  remains  always  the  same.  Everywhere 
it  *is  the  joint  activity  of  the  Creator  and  his 
creature  offspring.  Everywhere  we  see  the  efforts 
of  the  latter  rewarded  by  responses  from  the 
former. 

And  furthermore,  we  are  indebted  to  the 
stimulus  that  has  come  to  the  study  of  biology, 
through  evolution,  for  another  help  of  the  greatest 
importance  to  theology.  Even  when  we  restore 
to  the  concept  mechanism  its  vital  half,  it  remains 
a  very  imperfect  instrument  with  which  to  measure 
the  relations  existing  between  man  and  his  Maker. 
The  quality  of  externality  is  a  great  flaw.  It 
continually  suggests  separation,  or  only  occasional 
communication,  which  is  misleading. 

But  the  study  of  cell-life  and  of  the  relations 
which  the  wonderfully  varied  and  complex  nervous 
system  sustains  to  the  central  consciousness  of 
the  organism,  supplies  us  with  a  most  satisfactory 
symbol  of  the  composite  relations  of  the  divine 
and  the  human.  We  need  no  longer  think  of  the 


THE  PROCESS  AND  ITS  INTERPRETATION     83 

machine  and  its  maker,  two  strongly  contrasted 
realities  that  have  been  vitally  connected,  but 
are  now  quite  set  off  from  each  other.  It  is  one 
living  and  inseparable  organism  that  we  con- 
template, every  part  of  which  is  alive  with  the 
same  kind  of  life;  all  the  members  of  which  sup- 
port each  other  in  a  great  complexity  of  relations 
and  which  find  their  ultimate  meaning  in  the  one 
unit  of  being,  the  human  ego. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE    OMNIPOTENCE    OF    GOD 

OUR  next  inquiry  must  be,  What  does 
evolution  testify  as  to  the  character- 
istics of  the  supreme,  indwelling  in- 
telligence which  it  discloses?  To  answer  this 
truthfully  we  must  try  to  divest  ourselves  of  all 
assumptions  derived  from  other  sources.  Our 
method  forbids  our  starting  off  in  the  high-handed, 
edict-pronouncing  way  of  the  old  theology.  We 
cannot  assume,  once  for  all,  that  the  Supreme 
Being  is  omnipotent,  omniscient,  omnipresent. 
Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  can  we  affirm  the  opposite. 
What  the  absolute  truth  with  regard  to  these 
attributes  may  be  we  can  never  know,  simply 
because  we  are  not  omnipotent,  omniscient,  and 
omnipresent.  What  we  aim  at  doing  is  to  study 
His  works  in  the  realm  made  known  to  human 
experience  and,  in  so  far  as  we  can  organize  the 
knowledge  so  acquired,  draw  inferences  from  it. 
Not  to  cut  loose  from  a  priori  assumptions 
would  be  like  starting  on  a  voyage  without 
weighing  anchor,  and  to  those  who  regard  lying 
at  anchor  as  the  chief  function  of  theology,  our 

84 


THE    OMNIPOTENCE    OF   GOD  85 

proceeding  will  seem  hazardous.  But  let  us 
have  patience  and  not  judge  this  matter  too 
hastily.  The  formal  statement  of  more  than  one 
principle  on  which  we  daily  act  would  shock 
us  and,  perhaps,  call  forth  a  protest.  The  shock 
is  occasioned  by  the  traversing  of  a  conventional 
mode  of  expressing  ourselves.  To  be  asked  to 
entertain,  even  hypothetically,  the  thought  of 
deity  without  omnipotence  will  occasion  just 
such  a  shock  to  some  minds;  but  this  is  largely 
a  matter  of  language,  and  in  what  follows  I  shall 
try  to  make  clear  that  there  never  was  a  more 
mistaken  idea  than  that  which  makes  the  doctrine 
of  the  omnipotence  of  God  a  vital  part  of  our 
religion.  We  have  in  reality  never  held  it  in  any 
other  than  an  obstructive  sense.  It  has  been 
like  a  dumb  idol  to  which  we  have  formally  bent 
the  knee  and  then  gone  on  our  way  leading  our 
religious  lives,  and  justifying  our  belief  in  God's 
goodness,  by  the  light  of  conceptions  that  are  the 
practical  denial  of  omnipotence.  But  our  present 
concern  is  not  with  the  old  theology. 

What  does  evolution  teach  us  with  regard  to  the 
omnipotence  of  God?  There  are  two  quite  distinct 
ways  of  approaching  the  problem.  We  may  inter- 
rogate the  great  process  as  a  whole,  or  we  may 
occupy  ourselves  with  the  study  of  details.  Let 
us  glance  first  at  one  and  then  at  the  other. 

When  we  contemplate  the  overarching  princi- 
ples and  motives  of  evolution  we  experience  a 
sense    of    boundlessness    that    suggests    infinity. 


86  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

We  find  ourselves  in  a  universe  filled  with  God. 
We  see  Him  at  every  point  in  the  process  of  the 
ages,  working  within  it,  sustaining,  controlling, 
vitalizing  all  its  elements,  quickening  and  expand- 
ing it  with  an  ever-renewed  initiative  as  it  is 
made  to  bring  forth  higher  and  still  higher 
products.  In  the  contemplation  of  organic  life 
there  passes  before  us  a  grand  pageant  of  creation 
extending  through  endless  forms,  from  the  single 
protoplasmic  cell  to  the  greatest  and  wisest  of 
human  kind.  It  is  a  sublime  continuity  of 
becoming,  of  training,  of  revelation,  of  creation, 
of  salvation  of  the  highest  inherent  possibilities 
of  the  process. 

This  view  of  evolution,  which  is  not  only  a 
legitimate  one  but  also  the  truest,  in  that  it  is 
the  most  comprehensive,  gives  us  a  God  Whom 
we  can  worship,  Whose  power  and  wisdom  is 
set  before  us  as  inexpressibly  great,  and  as  one 
Who  can  be  trusted  to  carry  to  a  successful  issue 
that  which  He  has  undertaken.  We  may  ex- 
haust all  the  superlatives  of  language  in  address- 
ing Him  if  we  employ  them  only  as  the  expression 
of  exalted  feeling. 

But  there  is  another  side  to  it.  The  moment 
we  descend  from  the  survey  of  the  great  features 
of  the  process  to  the  study  of  detail  we  are  con- 
fronted by  aspects  of  deity  that  are  altogether 
foreign  to  our  traditional  conceptions  of  God. 
Here  He  discloses  Himself  as  one  Who  has  em- 
ployed, for  the  accomplishment  of  His  ends,  a  long 


THE   OMNIPOTENCE   OF   GOD  87 

and  elaborate  process.  His  work  gives  the  im- 
pression of  one  Who  moves  slowly,  tentatively,  as 
it  were  feeling  His  way,  to  some  dimly  foreseen 
end  by  the  use  of  instrumentalities  not  thoroughly 
mastered;  the  process  is  apparently  character- 
ized by  many  setbacks,  by  unfulfilled  promises, 
roads  that  seem  to  have  been  built  a  certain  way 
and  abandoned.  Although,  viewed  as  a  whole,  the 
process  is  seen  to  be  a  grand  and  ever-expanding 
movement  upward  on  the  scale  of  being,  there 
is  also  an  immense  amount  of  destruction  and 
incidental  waste;  there  is  much  conflict  and  much 
suffering  on  the  part  of  creatures  so  constituted 
as  to  be  capable  of  great  happiness.  In  short, 
the  God  of  evolution  appears  to  be  one  Who,  like 
ourselves,  is  beset  with  limitations  over  which  He 
triumphs  by  the  use  of  infinitely  varied  appliances 
and  adjustments. 

To  treat  these  first  judgments  as  the  adequate 
expression  of  the  truth  would,  of  course,  be  pre- 
posterous. In  any  complicated  system  of  things 
the  power  manifested  at  any  given  point,  or  at 
a  great  number  of  points,  by  a  controlling  agent 
is  no  index  of  the  amount  of  power  available. 
Every  factor  in  such  a  system  limits  all  the  others. 
To  estimate  the  amount  of  ability  behind  it  we 
must  know  not  only  what  the  ultimate  purpose  of 
the  system  is,  but  also  all  the  subsidiary  interests 
involved.  To  avoid  being  swamped  by  details 
it  is  necessary  that  we  hold  fast  to  the  thought 
of  the  system  as  a  whole. 


88  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  implications  that 
we  have  been  considering  have  their  significance, 
and  it  is  one  that  profoundly  affects  the  issues 
of  constructive  thought.  For  one  thing,  it  is  the 
endorsement,  on  a  large  scale,  of  the  analogical 
method  of  seeking  truth.  In  evolution  He  Whom 
we  call  the  Almighty  has  revealed  Himself  through- 
out nature  as  a  being  Whom  we  can  progressively 
interpret  by  the  study  of  our  own  methods  and 
experiences.  Evolution  invites  us,  nay,  com- 
mands us,  to  come  and  learn  from  it,  as  from 
an  open  book,  of  the  God  Whom  we  have  been 
taught  to  regard  as  incomprehensible.  The  idea 
of  infinity  has  kept  us  at  a  distance  from  Him, 
has  held  us  in  leash,  as  it  were,  from  studying 
Him  as  He  is  revealed  in  nature  and  throughout 
the  whole  realm  of  our  human  experience. 

It  has  told  us  nothing  whatever  about  Him, 
but  only  what  He  is  not.  It  has  been  a  great  and 
all-comprehensive  denial  of  the  community  of 
our  nature  and  His,  a  destructive  blight  upon  the 
natural  growth  of  our  minds  toward  Him.  We 
are  finite,  He  is  infinite.  Our  thought,  limited 
in  every  direction,  is  necessarily  the  antithesis  of 
His  unlimited,  all-comprehensive  thought.  His 
emotions,  if  He  has  any,  are  the  emotions  of 
one  Who  is  an  absolute  stranger  to  all  opposition, 
Who  has  never  known  the  tug  or  the  joy  of  over- 
coming, Who  has  never  experienced  the  enthu- 
siasm of  pursuit,  the  long-drawn-out  pleasure  of 
gradual  approach  through  difficulties  to  the 


THE    OMNIPOTENCE    OF   GOD  89 

attainment  of  an  object  or  condition  earnestly 
desired.  He  has  never,  and  never  can,  experience 
the  delight  of  the  onrush  of  a  new  thought  or  the 
dawning  and  growth  of  a  new  faculty.  In  a  word 
we  have,  in  our  short-sightedness,  while  thinking 
to  honour  Him  with  high-sounding  titles,  only 
crowned  Him  with  emptiness  and  vacuity.  While 
declaring  Him  unlimited  we  have,  from  the 
standpoint  of  our  knowledge,  made  Him  the  abso- 
lutely limited  one.  For,  so  far  as  His  infinity  is 
concerned,  He  is  to  us  a  meaningless  blank. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  the  same  theology  that 
erected  these  barriers  of  thought  has  also  ad- 
mitted the  frank  and  wholesome  anthropomor- 
phism of  the  old  Hebrew  religion,  which  has  come 
down  to  us  emphasized  by  the  cult  of  Christianity. 
These  two  have  lived  along  together,  with  the 
result  that  the  worship  of  the  God-man  has 
almost  entirely  overshadowed  that  of  God  the 
Father,  the  creator  of  the  world,  and  the  God  of 
nature.  Necessarily,  for  He  of  the  infinite  attri- 
butes furnished  no  food  to  satisfy  the  religious 
cravings  of  his  would-be  worshippers.  We  have 
been  able  to  live  under  this  mixed  regime,  but 
only  a  cramped  and  stunted  intellectual  growth 
was  possible.  From  the  one  and  only  outlet  for 
the  human  mind  in  constructive  thought,  the 
gateway  of  analogy,  we  were  logically  debarred. 
Whenever  we  have  set  ourselves  down  hoping  to 
figure  out  on  our  little  slates  the  problems  set 
for  us  by  the  great  educator,  theology  with  its 


90  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

wet  sponge  of  infinity  has  obliterated  all  our 
work  and  left  us  staring  at  vacuity. 

It  is  just  the  reverse  with  evolution.  Here  we 
find  ourselves  in  an  atmosphere  of  encourage- 
ment. Our  analogical  efforts  are  approved.  At 
every  stage  of  the  work  we  receive  new  and  help- 
ful suggestions  for  its  continuance.  Our  prob- 
lems, it  is  true,  are  ever  expanding  before  us 
with  innumerable  outlooks.  We  shall  never  get 
to  the  end  of  them,  but  we  feel  increasingly  that 
we  are  on  the  right  track. 

Is  it  the  problem  of  God's  power  in  creation? 
We  are  intimately  acquainted  with  ourselves  as 
creators,  as  bringing  into  existence  a  little  world 
by  the  use  of  instrumentalities.  By  these  in- 
strumentalities we  are,  at  the  same  time,  aided 
and  limited.  We  are  absolutely  dependent  upon 
them,  we  can  do  nothing  without  them;  they, 
in  one  sense,  control  us.  At  the  same  time  we 
make  them  forward  our  plans,  bend  them  to  our 
purposes,  lead  them  into  special  channels,  over- 
rule them  in  the  interests  of  the  individual  and 
of  society.  So  doing,  we  accomplish  great  things, 
but  these  great  things  are  characterized  by  great 
imperfections.  The  responsibility  for  some  of 
these  imperfections  rests  upon  us,  but  for  a  very 
much  larger  class  it  is  justly  laid  upon  the  nature 
of  things.  We  are  limited  not  only  by  our  very 
imperfect  knowledge  of  the  possibilities  of  things, 
we  are  limited  also  by  those  possibilities  them- 
selves. And  when  we  look  at  the  world  of  man's 


THE    OMNIPOTENCE    OF   GOD  91 

achievement,  with  its  wonderful  extent  and 
variety,  our  amazement  is  called  forth  not  because 
he  has  accomplished  so  little,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
because,  with  all  his  limitations  and  in  spite  of 
the  seeming  rigidity  and  obduracy  of  the  materials 
with  which  he  has  had  to  work,  he  has  accom- 
plished so  much  and  gives  promise  of  accomplish- 
ing so  much  more. 

Just  so,  from  the  standpoint  of  this  analogy, 
our  minds  should  be  filled  with  amazement  be- 
cause of  what  the  world  is  and  what  it  promises 
to  be,  rather  than  with  criticism  because  it 
falls  short  of  some  ideal  condition  of  things 
that  we  should  like  to  substitute  for  it.  If  we 
once  admit  the  thought  that  He  who  created  the 
world,  as  we  know  it,  laboured  under  limitations 
of  some  kind  analogous  to  those  which  we  have 
to  meet  and  triumph  over,  we  are  ready  to  wor- 
ship rather  than  to  find  fault.  Remembering 
our  own  tribulations  and  triumphs,  our  hearts 
go  out  in  sympathy  and  thankfulness  for  what 
has  been  hitherto  and  for  that  which  shall  be. 

Shorn  of  the  word  omnipotence,  the  idea  of  God 
becomes  something  less  awe-inspiring,  perhaps, 
less  mysterious,  less  removed  from  us  and  all  our 
possibilities,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  becomes 
something  more  real,  more  intelligibly  worship- 
ful, infinitely  more  moral  and  love-inspiring.  He 
appears  as  one  Who  shares  the  battle  with  us, 
Who  counts  on  us  as  supporters  in  the  world- 
process.  Omnipotence  divided  Him,  as  by  an 


92  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

unfathomable  gulf,  from  us.  We  worshipped  we 
knew  not  what,  a  being  of  inconceivable  attri- 
butes. The  God  of  evolution  is,  on  the  con- 
trary, one  Whom  we  can  measurably  understand, 
one  with  Whom  we  can  live  in  sympathy.  He 
is  one  to  love  and  to  work  for.  Our  devotion  to 
Him  is  not  a  mere  fleeting  incense,  it  is  a  pos- 
itive factor  in  a  world-not-yet-finished,  in  a  pro- 
cess which  may  be  advanced,  or  hindered,  by  the 
way  in  which  we  lead  our  lives.  What  we  should 
most  earnestly  desire  is  not  the  absolute  con- 
fidence of  a  foregone  conclusion,  but  an  uncon- 
querable faith,  a  faith  that  is  synonymous  with 
devotion,  courage,  loyalty. 

The  writer  is  not  forgetful  of  the  other  side  of 
this  view  of  things,  and  that  there  are  those  who 
are  so  constituted,  temperamentally,  that  they 
will  be  able  to  see  in  the  erasure  of  the  word 
omnipotent  nothing  short  of  the  annihilation  of 
our  belief  in  a  God  of  supreme  power  and  majesty. 
It  is  so  easy  for  some  of  us  to  plunge  from  one 
extreme  to  another  that  the  only  alternative  to 
the  imputation  of  this  impossible  attribute  is  to 
think  of  God  as  one  Who  is  in  all  respects  limited 
and  fallible.  But,  as  matter  of  fact,  all  that 
evolution  does,  as  regards  this  divine  character- 
istic, is  to  take  that  which  has  always  been  our 
working  belief  under  its  transforming  influence 
and  give  it  back  to  us  purged  of  its  negativeness 
and  re-enforced  with  the  vitality  of  a  positive 
proposition. 


THE    OMNIPOTENCE   OF   GOD  93 

I  say  our  working  belief;  for  always,  as  related 
to  the  other  doctrines  of  our  faith,  we  have 
employed  a  conception  of  God  that  involves 
limitation.  We  could  not  do  otherwise;  for  it 
was  impossible  to  eliminate  the  idea  of  a  condi- 
tioned being  without  at  the  same  time  eliminating 
the  idea  of  personality.  And  with  the  belief  in 
personality  gone,  the  bottom  drops  out  of  our 
constructive  thought.  Our  inherited  theology 
had  a  semblance  of  coherence  only  because,  in 
violation  of  its  assumptions  with  regard  to  in- 
finity, it  admitted  personality.  And  those  who 
see  in  the  frank  admission  of  the  issue  which 
evolution  forces  upon  us  the  annihilation  of  our 
belief  in  a  God  of  power  and  inexpressible  majesty 
may  comfort  themselves  with  the  reflection  that 
this  ennobling  belief  has  somehow  managed  to  live 
through  the  ages  linked  with  the  belief  in  His 
limitation. 

The  great  and  central  doctrine  of  the  Atone- 
ment most  distinctly  represents  the  Almighty  as 
inexorably  hedged  in  by  a  necessity,  in  the  nature 
of  things,  involving  a  sacrifice  at  which,  in  Milton's 
words,  "  all  heaven  stood  aghast."  And  in  the 
same  connection,  God  the  Father  is  represented 
as  explaining  Himself  to  the  angels  with  regard 
to  the  status  of  fallible  man  by  adducing  the 
limitations  that  obliged  Him  to  create  this  being, 
made  in  His  own  image,  with  just  the  amount 
of  freedom  and  weakness  that  resulted  in  his 
fall. 


94  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

More  emphatically  still  does  our  traditional 
theology  display  this  inconsistency  in  its  account 
of  the  entrance  of  moral  evil  into  the  world. 
The  Creator  planned,  called  into  existence,  and 
launched  on  its  course  what  He  pronounced  to 
be  a  perfect  world.  But  somehow  there  were 
flaws  in  this  plan  that  escaped  His  omniscience, 
and  so  there  came  to  pass  a  great  breakdown  in 
its  working.  It  failed  utterly  just  in  that  part 
on  which  he  had  set  His  heart.  According  to 
our  theology,  man  was  created  a  perfect  being; 
he  was  the  head  of  creation;  he  walked  with  God 
and  was  loved  and  approved  by  Him.  But  lo! 
a  great  catastrophe.  Sin  entered,  and  all  the 
fair  promise  of  his  incipient  career  was  blighted. 
With  his  failure  everything  else  went  wrong. 
The  very  ground  was  cursed  for  his  sake,  and  the 
harmony  that  characterized  the  original  scheme 
of  things  became  discord. 

In  this  narrative,  the  multitude  of  failures 
apparent  in  evolution  are  gathered  into  one. 
But  does  this  help  matters?  From  the  rational 
point  of  view  by  which  we  are  testing  the  new 
revelation,  the  one  great  breakdown,  the  terrible 
centre-shaking  catastrophe,  for  the  most  part 
irretrievable,  presents  an  incalculably  greater  ob- 
stacle to  faith  in  the  ability  of  the  Creator  to 
carry  out  His  plans  than  the  innumerable  instances 
of  seeming  failure  that  appear  all  along  the  course 
of  the  great  process.  These,  by  comparison,  are 
things  of  minor  significance  and  not  difficult  to 


THE   OMNIPOTENCE   OF   GOD  95 

deal  with;  for  they  are  each  one  embedded  in  a 
vast  system  of  things,  a  system  which  we  now 
recognize  as  a  process  of  the  ages,  of  which  we 
can  see  but  a  little  part,  but  enough  to  be  certain 
that  it  is  no  mere  play  of  blind  forces.  It  is  a 
continued  progress,  in  which  we  can  see  apparent 
mistakes  eliminated,  apparent  failures  redeemed 
by  success  in  other  directions,  in  which  destruction 
is  often  shown  to  be  the  removal  of  hindrances, 
and  in  which  the  circuitous  course  leads  to  the 
goal.  There  is  no  permanent  setback  in  its 
whole  history.  There  is  no  discovery  of  a  break 
in  the  plan,  no  change  of  policy.  It  is,  as  a 
whole,  one  grand  continuity  of  becoming,  one 
long,  consistent  story  of  successive  triumphs 
pointing  still  onward  to  we  know  not  what  great 
consummations. 

Again,  our  inherited  theology  recognized  the 
idea  of  a  rebellious  element,  adopted  perhaps  from 
the  Persian  religion,  with  which  the  Hebrew  was, 
at  one  time,  in  such  close  contact.  God,  though 
omnipotent,  tolerated  for  some  reason  the  Devil 
and  his  angels,  and  they  held  a  conspicuous  and 
often  tragically  real  place  in  the  thought  and  lives 
of. our  not-remote  ancestors.  This  was  a  relief 
to  those  who  did  not  look  beyond  the  surface  of 
the  problem  of  evil.  But  for  those  who  did,  it 
was  the  opposite  of  reassuring;  for  the  doctrine 
of  omnipotence  fastened  the  responsibility  for 
the  unchecked  activity  of  the  Devil  and  his 
angels  on  the  one  God  Whom  they,  at  the  same 


96  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

time,  wished  to  worship  as  a  God  of  love.  In 
other  words,  the  idea  of  God  as  limited  was 
implicit  in  the  idea  of  God  as  benevolent,  as  well 
as  in  the  idea  of  God  as  a  person.  And  practi- 
cally we  have  always  thought  of  the  divine  agency 
as  characterized  by  an  associated  freedom  and 
determinism  similar  to  that  which  we  find  in 
human  agency. 

Before  leaving  this  part  of  the  subject  I  will 
venture  to  call  attention  to  the  finality  with 
which  our  deductions  from  evolution  drive  into 
outer  darkness  two  bogies  that  have  tyrannized 
over  constructive  thinking.  One  of  these  is 
known  as  "the  relativity  of  human  thought,"  the 
other  as  "anthropomorphism."  Not  that  there 
have  been  lacking  minds  sufficiently  sturdy  to 
set  them  at  naught,  but  that  they  have  been 
used,  now  and  again,  with  great  success  in  turning 
the  average  thinker  away  from  the  legitimate 
avenues  of  progressive  knowledge  and  into  the 
barren  by-ways  of  scepticism. 

It  is,  perhaps,  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  I 
am  not  questioning  the  fact  of  the  relativity  of 
human  thought.  Kant's  position  that  man  can 
know,  directly,  no  more  of  the  nature  of  things 
than  his  own  mode  of  perceiving  them,  which  is 
peculiar  to  himself,  is  not  only  sound,  but  one 
which  is  illustrated  to  us  every  day  of  our  lives, 
both  in  our  intercourse  with  other  human  beings 
and  in  our  relations  to  the  animals  farther  removed 
from  us  by  differences  of  organization.  But,  on 


THE   OMNIPOTENCE   OF   GOD  07 

the  other  hand,  it  is  equally  true,  and  a  matter 
of  far  more  vital  interest  to  us,  that  our  mode  of 
perceiving  things,  peculiar  as  it  is  to  each  one  of 
us,  is,  analogically,  a  trustworthy  guide  to  the 
interpretation  of  minds  differing  in  important 
respects  from  ours.  The  farther  removed  any 
two  persons  are,  by  birth,  training,  or  tempera- 
ment, the  more  likely  they  are  to  make  mistakes 
in  their  efforts  to  comprehend  each  other,  but  in 
virtue  of  their  common  humanity  they  are  able 
to  arrive  at  a  fairly  reliable  understanding.  It  is 
the  same  in  our  relations  to  the  lower  animals. 

These  considerations  are,  on  general  principles, 
a  sufficient  answer  to  the  assumption  of  sceptical 
thinkers  that  we  are  for  ever  debarred  from  any 
knowledge  of  a  being  who  transcends  our  immedi- 
ate experience,  because  of  the  relativity  of  our 
human  thought. 

Even  before  the  facts  of  evolution  were  made 
known  we  were  in  a  position  to  say  that  there 
probably  exists  in  the  world  a  being  possessed  of 
an  intelligence  and  a  creative  power  far  exceeding 
ours,  and  furthermore,  that  this  being  probably 
works,  as  we  are  obliged  to  work,  under  limita- 
tions of  some  sort.  This  was  a  legitimate  and 
justifiable  hypothesis,  depending  for  its  verifica- 
tion upon  its  practical  working  in  our  lives, 
and  awaiting  endorsement  or  the  reverse,  in  the 
testimony  of  our  subsequent  experience.  With 
evolution  that  endorsement  has  come.  Our  hypo- 
thetical construction  has  been  justified.  What 

7 


98  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

we  prophesied  ought,  in  conformity  to  known 
principles,  to  be  discovered,  has  been  discovered. 
Some  of  the  methods  by  which  our  postulated 
Supreme  Being  works  have  been  disclosed,  and 
they  are,  on  a  vast  scale,  the  corroboration  of  our 
analogically  formed  hypothesis. 

The  obstructive  claims  of  the  relativity  of 
human  thought,  therefore,  have  received  a  refu- 
tation not  of  words,  but  of  facts.  The  question 
as  to  our  ability  to  transcend  experience  is  no 
longer  a  living  issue.  We  have  transcended  it. 
And  let  it  be  observed  that  evolution  has  thus 
become,  not  only  an  emphatic  endorsement  of  our 
postulated  Creator,  but  an  endorsement  of  the 
method  of  analogy  as  a  whole. 

The  same  considerations  apply  to  the  word 
anthropomorphism.  It  has  been  a  byword  and 
a  hissing,  a  name  to  conjure  with,  not  because 
there  is  anything  ridiculous  about  the  attempt 
to  conceive  the  personality  of  the  God  Who  is 
in  touch  with  us,  by  the  use  of  humanly  derived 
analogies,  but  solely,  because  we  have  tried  to 
do  this  while  insisting  upon  the  infinite  attributes 
of  the  same  God.  The  cherishing  of  these  time- 
honoured  claims  invalidated  our  right  to  the  use 
of  analogy  and  at  the  same  time  made  us  the 
prey  of  our  opponents.  Our  teachers  and  our 
preachers,  the  representatives  of  a  God  of  infinity, 
have,  unwarrantably,  taken  the  liberty  to  apply 
the  analogies  of  our  experience  to  the  explication 
of  the  God  Who  works  in  the  world  of  nature. 


THE   OMNIPOTENCE   OF   GOD  99 

They  could  not  do  otherwise  if  they  identified 
Him  with  the  God  of  the  Hebrew  religion,  or  if 
they  made  Him  in  any  way  intelligible. 

But, ,  judged  by  the  assumptions  of  their 
theology,  they  were  trespassing;  they  had  no 
rights  in  this  analogical  realm.  And  there 
were  those  who  were  not  slow  to  raise  the 
hue  and  cry  against  them.  The  illegitimacy  of 
their  proceeding  was  flagrant.  A  God  infinite 
in  all  His  attributes,  the  antithesis  of  man  in 
every  essential,  and  yet  one  Who  was  to  be  appre- 
hended through  analogies  derived  from  this  same 
finite  man!  The  scientific  and  logical  inad- 
missibility  of  such  a  conjunction  of  ideas  was 
easily  made  to  appear.  They  were  told  that 
their  reasoning  was  puerile  and  preposterous, 
they  were  accused  of  that  most  dreadful  thing, 
anthropomorphism.  Nor  was  it  possible  to  shake 
off  their  tormentors  without  either  surrendering 
the  most  vital  thing  in  their  constructions,  that 
is,  analogically  derived  conceptions,  or,  on  the 
other  hand,  their  old  cherished  metaphysical 
idols. 

Let  them  adopt  the  latter  course  and  the 
vigour  of  a  new  life  characterizes  their  mental 
processes;  not  that  alone  which  is  born  of  con- 
sistency, the  straightening  out  of  an  old  thought 
that  has  been  sorely  tangled,  but,  in  addition, 
the  quickening  of  every  pulse  of  thought  by  the 
incoming  of  the  new  vision,  the  enlargement  and 
liberty  that  accompanies  the  far-away  view  where, 


100  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

hitherto,  all  has  been  enveloped  in  the  fogs  of 
abstract  ideas. 

Since  God  is  known  to  be  one  Who  works  by 
methods  that  may  be  likened  to  ours,  every  experi- 
ence of  ours,  every  problem  solved,  every  difficulty 
against  which  we  contend  throws  some  light  upon 
the  meaning  of  the  way  which  He  takes.  His 
problems  are  our  problems.  His  good  is  our  good. 
His  evil  is  our  evil.  He  is  engaged  in  overcoming 
as  we  are  engaged  in  overcoming.  We  are  one 
with  Him,  not  simply  in  a  mystical  or  meta- 
physical sense,  but  really  and  practically,  in  that 
His  interests  are  our  interests.  The  realization 
of  the  highest  possibilities  of  our  individual  lives 
is,  so  far  forth,  the  realization  of  the  great  world- 
process.  We  are  involved  in  it,  a  part  of  it.  To 
each  one  of  us  is  intrusted  a  definite  work  to 
accomplish  in  the  onward  march  of  the  world's 
becoming.  Hence  all  our  progressive  knowledge 
of  nature  and  of  human  nature,  all  that  we  dis- 
cover as  to  what  is  possible,  desirable,  expedient,  or 
necessary  in  our  social  relations,  contributes  in- 
directly to  our  knowledge  of  God  and  becomes 
valuable  material  for  our  theological  constructions. 

Without  misgivings  as  to  the  legitimacy  of 
our  procedure  we  can  advance  in  the  full  and 
joyful  courage  of  our  convictions.  The  order  of 
nature  bids  us  go  on.  The  continuity  of  the 
method  that  has  characterized  the  world-process 
hitherto,  assures  us  that  we  are  on  the  right  track 
and  walking  in  the  light  when  we  try  to  trace 


THE   OMNIPOTENCE  OF    GOD  \\\  \\\  101 

God's  purposes  and  ways  as  the  reflection  of  our 
own  dearly  bought  experience.  If  we  are  faithful 
in  our  adherence  to  this  method,  whole  realms  of 
reality  will  become  subject  to  our  thought  that 
have  hitherto  been  the  wild  haunts  of  untamable 
problems. 


CHAPTER   VI 

EVOLUTION  AND  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  GOD'S 
BENEVOLENCE 

WE  have  seen  that  if,  in  obedience  to  the 
facts  of  evolution,  we  surrender  the 
time-honoured  assumptions  of  theol- 
ogy with  regard  to  the  infinite  attributes  of  God, 
our  losses  are  offset  by  a  gain  of  inestimable 
value;    namely,  the    setting    of    our   intellectual 
house  in  order  and  the    emancipation     of    our 
reasoning  faculties. 


When  now  we  go  on  to  ask  of  evolution  what  it 
has  to  teach  us  with  regard  to  the  doctrine  of 
God's  benevolence,  it  will  be  manifest  that  we 
have  only  begun  to  recognize  the  value  of  the 
freedom  that  has  been  secured  to  us  by  the  dis- 
missal of  these  abstractions.  So  long  as  we  re- 
mained subject  to  them  we  were  harnessed  to  an 
absolutely  unworkable  doctrine  of  the  benevo- 
lence of  God.  The  problem  of  evil,  as  it  is  called, 
owes  its  gravity  almost  wholly  to  the  assertion  of 
God's  omnipotence.  It  is  the  fulcrum  of  the 
argumentative  lever  that,  from  a  rational  point 

102 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  103 

of  view,  has  proved  irresistible  against  any  and 
every  attempt  to  formulate  a  defence  of  the 
doctrine  that  lies  at  the  heart  of  our  religion. 
We  have  not  only  made  no  progress  toward  the 
solution  of  this  problem  of  evil,  but,  in  these 
later  days,  the  situation  has  been  aggravated  by 
the  light  which  evolution  has  thrown  upon  the 
methods  through  which  the  world  has  come  to 
be  what  it  is. 

We  have,  it  is  true,  tried  to  formulate  tentative 
explanations  of  the  dreadful  happenings  of  the 
world.  When  some  great  misfortune  has  befallen 
us,  or  our  friends,  or  the  community  in  which  we 
live,  when  the  long-drawn-out  tragedies  of  wast- 
ing illness,  of  droughts  and  floods,  of  famine  and 
forest  fires  have  appalled  us,  when  an  earthquake 
has  laid  a  great  city  in  ruins,  killing  and  maiming 
thousands  of  men,  women,  and  children  and 
entailing  wretchedness  upon  thousands  more  who 
have  lost  their  all,  we  have  tried,  perhaps,  to  meet 
the  situation  manfully.  We  have  summoned 
visions  of  the  other  side  of  the  picture,  making 
this  and  that  hypothesis  to  explain  why  for  our 
good,  or  for  that  of  the  world,  it  might  be  a  moral 
necessity  that  we  and  it  should  be  subjected  to 
such  tragedies.  Or,  we  have  said,  it  is  all  the  out- 
come of  the  order  of  nature,  an  order  that  had  to 
be  and  that  produces  much  more  good  than  evil  in 
the  world.  But,  however  cogent  our  reasonings 
may  have  been,  they  have,  anon,  dashed  them- 
selves into  spray  against  the  infinite  attributes  of 


104  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

God  that  have  suddenly  loomed  before  us.  Is  not 
the  Omnipotent  One  also  the  author  of  nature? 
Did  He  not  foresee  these  and  all  the  other  horrible 
things  that  would  necessarily  flow  from  it?  And 
why  did  He  not,  if  omnipotent,  establish  an  order 
free  from  such  dreadfulness? 

Only  two  answers  are  possible,  one  of  which  is 
no  answer,  but  a  rebuke.  It  may  be  said  this  is 
God's  secret,  we  cannot  understand  it,  it  is  rebellion 
to  try  to  understand  it.  Or,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  may  entertain  the  hypothesis  that  the  omnipo- 
tence of  God  is  not  quite  so  absolute  as  we  have 
imagined  it  to  be.  There  may  be,  we  hesitatingly 
admit,  limitations  in  the  nature  of  things  which 
oblige  the  Supreme  Intelligence  and  Will  of  the 
world  not,  as  some  would  put  it,  to  do  evil  that 
good  might  come,  but  to  choose  the  least  of  two 
evils:  on  the  one  hand,  a  world  without  life,  or, 
on  the  other,  a  world  with  life  and  incidental  evil. 
This,  as  we  have  seen,  is  also  the  conclusion  forced 
upon  us  by  God's  revelation  of  His  methods  in 
evolution,  and  no  sooner  do  we  let  go  our  hold 
on  our  inherited  predispositions  and  embrace 
frankly  the  implications  of  nature  than  the  spell 
is  broken. 

A  ray  of  light  penetrates  the  darkness  of  our 
theological  cave  and,  if  we  follow  it  up,  it  will 
bring  us  out  into  daylight.  This  one  little  perhaps 
is  enough  to  begin  with.  It  makes  all  the  differ- 
ence between  no  light  at  all  and  the  knowledge 
that  there  exists  a  realm  of  light  and  that  we, 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  105 

moreover,  know  the  direction  in  which  it  lies. 
Furnished  with  this,  all  our  constructive  powers 
are  quickened.  We  have  a  well-defined  goal  of 
religious  thought  to  strive  for,  an  occupation  for 
every  one  of  our  highest  faculties,  and  the  means 
for  the  prosecution  of  our  work  flow  in  upon  us 
the  moment  we  concentrate  our  attention  on  its 
achievement.  All  our  discarded  arguments  for 
the  possible  benevolence  of  God  reformulate 
themselves  and  take  on  the  hue  of  health  and 
vigour.  We  have  every  reason  now  to  foster  and 
encourage  them.  We  feel  instinctively  that  the 
life  pulsating  in  them  is  but  the  feeble  outlying 
manifestation  of  a  larger,  fuller  knowledge  that 
may  be  ours.  A  host  of  considerations  rally  to 
our  assistance. 

Having  set  up  the  hypothesis  that  there  is 
some  inherent  opposition  in  the  nature  of  things 
that  has  to  be  overcome  in  the  interests  of  the 
best  possible  world,  and  believing  that  it  is  legiti- 
mate to  assume  that  the  conditions  which  limit 
the  Supreme  Intelligence  are,  in  some  measure, 
similar  to  those  which  we  have  to  encounter,  we 
have  an  inspiring  work  cut  out  for  us.  And  the 
first  effect  of  this  change  of  attitude  is  to  turn 
the  criticism  that  we  have  been  directing  against 
the  Creator  upon  ourselves. 

What  has  been  the  ground  of  that  criticism? 
We  can  have  no  ground  whatever  for  fault- 
finding unless  we  have  thought  out  some  better 
plan  for  conducting  the  world  than  the  one  which 


106  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

we  find  in  operation.  We  know  much  about  the 
nature  of  things  and  the  antagonistic  behaviour 
of  the  forces  with  which  we  have  had  to  deal,  and 
we  remind  ourselves  of  the  unwearied  patience 
and  persistence  against  repeated  failures  that  have 
characterized  the  achievements  of  our  race;  and 
looking  back  over  its  career,  we  apply  tentatively 
the  analogies  of  this  human  experience  to  the 
explication  of  the  methods  of  evolution.  What 
do  we  find? 

Can  we,  from  what  we  have  learned  of  the 
nature  of  things,  point  out  how  animated  nature 
could  have  been  constructed  so  as  to  have  secured 
all  the  good  results  embodied  in  it  without  the 
stimulations  and  restraints  that  each  creature 
finds  in  its  environment? 

All  the  exuberant  life  and  joyfulness  of  the 
animated  world  have  come  into  being  not  in 
spite  of  the  adverse  influences  and  obstacles  that 
every  species  has  to  encounter,  but  directly 
because  of  those  conditions.  The  difficulty  of 
finding  food,  the  alertness  and  activity  that  are 
required  every  day  in  the  avoidance  or  thwart- 
ing of  hostile  influences,  the  battles  that  have  to 
be  fought,  and  the  sharpening  of  its  wits  in  conse- 
quence —  all  these  are  the  very  cause  and  source 
of  the  exuberant  happiness  that  characterizes 
nature  through  its  length  and  breadth. 

There  is  also,  it  is  true,  defeat  and  suffering; 
forfeits  have  to  be  paid  all  along  the  course.  But 
death  comes  to  all  soon  or  late,  and  would  it  be 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  107 

an  improvement  that  every  creature  should  be 
able  to  live  out  its  life  to  the  bitter  end,  dying 
by  inches  of  old  age  and  nothing  to  do,  rather 
than  by  a  short  stroke  when  life  is  at  its  full  tide? 
The  evolution  that  we  know  has  a  very  beneficent 
side  to  it.  It  has  everywhere  provided  for  the 
emergence  of  those  conscious  states  that  are  the 
source  of  joy  in  all  living  things:  the  sense  of 
movement,  of  progress,  the  sense  of  achievement, 
the  sense  of  triumph  over  difficulties,  the  joy  of 
love  in  the  time  of  mating,  of  nest-building,  of 
producing  and  rearing  and  defending  progeny. 
Why  should  we  doubt  that  every  animal  feels  a 
joy  in  the  unfolding  of  its  faculties,  akin  to  that 
which  we  feel  in  our  more  self-conscious  realiza- 
tions of  growing  personality. 

From  the  earliest  stages  of  organic  life  onward 
the  dynamic  of  progress  seems  inseparably  bound 
up  with  the  struggle  for  existence.  Effort  on  the 
part  of  the  creature  supplies  the  occasion  for  the 
expansion  of  the  organism  and  the  increase  of 
faculty.  It  is  impossible  for  us  to  imagine  how 
the  higher  values  of  life  could  have  been  reached 
otherwise. 

Again,  it  is  inconceivable  that  there  could  have 
existed  any  organized  creation,  good  or  bad, 
without  that  uniformity  which  we  call  the  fixed 
order  of  nature.  In  its  absence  we  can  think  only 
of  chaos.  And  yet  this  uniformity  is  seen  to  be 
a  principle  not  of  unmixed  good,  but  one  involving 
at  times  much  incidental  evil.  How  many  neces- 


108  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

sities  of  this  kind  there  may  be,  or  how  far-reaching 
they  are  we  cannot  know.  But,  an  increasing 
knowledge  of  them  is  sure  to  be  ours  if  we  are  on 
the  watch  to  discern  them.  The  discovery  of 
evolution  has  revealed  to  us  the  interdependence 
of  the  whole  scheme  of  things  as  we  never  knew 
it  before,  and  it  has  illustrated  this  with  a  wealth 
and  variety  of  facts  that  should  immensely  broaden 
our  estimate  of  the  multiplicity  and  the  complexity 
of  the  ends  that  must  be  taken  into  account  if  we 
try  to  explain  its  meaning. 

We  have,  as  it  were,  broken  into  the  labora- 
tory of  the  Great  Artificer  and  made  ourselves 
free  to  investigate  His  hitherto  secret  methods. 
But,  in  the  presence  of  these  wonders,  it  be- 
hoves us  to  conduct  ourselves  with  a  good 
degree  of  modesty,  to  remember  that  it  is  not 
by  the  incompleteness  that  appears  in  the  work- 
shop, not  by  the  multitude  of  things  we  find 
there,  of  which  we  cannot  discern  the  use,  that 
the  process  or  its  Author  is  to  be  judged.  Unless 
we  assume  that  we  have  the  same  grasp  of  the 
situation  that  He  has,  and  feel  that  we  are  able 
to  give  Him  points  as  to  a  shorter  and  better  way 
of  doing  things,  it  is  at  least  foolish  for  us  to  draw 
hasty  inferences  about  His  ability  from  these 
fragments  of  His  work. 

We  can  never  hope  to  get  more  than  glimpses 
on  this  side  and  on  that  of  the  maze  of  subsidiary 
ends  that  He  contemplates  in  their  entirety,  but 
those  glimpses  may  be  moral  tonics  of  great  value. 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  109 

Innumerable  instances  might  be  adduced;  I  will 
mention  only  one. 

In  that  familiar  and  classic  expression  of  distress 
that  occurs  in  the  fifty-fourth  canto  of  "In  Memo- 
riam,"  the  poet  dwells  with  painful  interest  on  the 
mysterious  fact  that  nature,  after  maturing  fifty 
seeds,  often  brings  but  one  to  bear,  and  the  dread- 
fulness  of  this  and  other  enigmas  provokes  that 
cry  of  a  wounded  faith: 

I  falter  where  I  firmly  trod, 

And,  falling  with  my  weight  of  cares 
Upon  the  great  world's  altar  stairs 

That  slope  through  darkness  up  to  God, 

I  stretch  lame  hands  of  faith,  and  grope, 
And  gather  dust  and  chaff,  and  call 
To  what  I  feel  is  Lord  of  all, 

And  faintly  trust  the  larger  hope. 

But,  if  for  a  moment  we  call  to  mind  the  fact 
that  one  of  the  greatest  industries  of  the  world  is 
the  production  of  thousands  upon  thousands  of 
seeds,  for  man's  food,  for  every  single  seed  that 
is  used  for  reproduction,  does  it  not  seem  needless 
for  us  to  blacken  our  souls  and  begin  to  lose  our 
faith  in  God  because  we  find  that  of  fifty  seeds 
He  often  brings  but  one  to  bear?  When  we 
reflect  upon  the  variety  of  the  tribes  that  God 
has  called  into  the  world  for  His  own  pleasure 
and  for  theirs,  and  of  the  never-ending  necessities 
of  that  world,  ought  we  not  to  be  consoled  for  the 
forty-nine  seeds  that  fail  to  germinate?  Some 


110  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  them  have  gone  to  enhance  the  happiness  of 
the  bird  that,  soaring  heavenwards,  pours  out  its 
little  soul  in  songs  of  thankfulness. 

I  am  not,  be  it  understood,  criticizing  the  above 
quotation  as  an  emotional  view  of  the  world. 
But  every  emotional  view  is  necessarily  one-sided 
and  can  be  regarded  as  an  expression  of  truth 
only  when  rectified  by  the  emotional  view  appro- 
priate to  the  contemplation  of  the  other  side. 

In  all  our  fault-finding  with  the  methods  of 
nature  let  us  lay  to  heart  the  fact  that  some  of 
the  worst  evils  to  which  the  pessimist  can  point 
are  the  results  of  man's  attempts  to  improve  that 
very  order  of  evolution  which  he  criticizes.  In  our 
efforts  to  relieve  the  unfortunate  we  are  often 
dismayed  to  find  that  we  have  pauperized  them 
and  that  their  number  increases  in  a  bewildering 
ratio.  In  our  efforts  to  educate  them  we  often 
unfit  them  for  the  stations  they  would  naturally 
fill,  the  work  they  are  capable  of  doing,  without 
successfully  adapting  them  to  anything  else.  We 
take  them  away  from  the  environment  which 
they  understand,  and  leading,  sometimes  driving, 
them  into  a  strange  land,  abandon  them  there. 
It  perhaps  seems  to  us  that  we  have  given  them 
a  better  heritage,  but  in  many  cases  they  are 
wholly  unable  to  adapt  themselves  to  it. 

I  believe  it  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  the 
great  problem  of  our  modern  civilization  is  not  to 
persuade  men  to  devote  themselves  largely  to  living 
for  others,  but  rather  to  discover  ways  of  doing 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  111 

this  which  will  not  aggravate  the  evils  that  we 
deplore.  I  am  not  questioning  the  legitimacy  or 
the  urgency  or,  in  the  long  run,  the  usefulness  of 
human  effort  in  this  direction.  We  are  intelligent 
factors  in  the  world-process  and  great  responsi- 
bilities are  ours.  The  Supreme  Wisdom  that 
works  in  all  things  has  taken  human  agency  into 
His  service  and  laid  great  tasks  upon  it. 

What  I  wish  to  point  out  is  this:  there  is  no 
royal  road  to  the  elevation  of  mankind.  Our 
theories  of  the  way  to  effect  it  are  easily  woven, 
and  our  Utopias,  as  we  dream  them,  look  as  easy 
of  attainment  as  they  are  delightful  to  anticipate. 
But  somehow  the  roads  that,  on  the  chart  of  our 
dream,  looked  so  well  constructed  on  a  substratum 
of  assumed  human  goodness,  have  proved  imprac- 
ticable. And  after  trying  our  hand  at  society- 
building,  we  have  had  to  come  back,  humbled  in 
spirit,  to  learn  of  nature.  We  have  had  our  eyes 
opened  to  the  fact  that  the  problem  is  a  vastly 
bigger  one  than  we  had  thought,  and  that  the 
Divinity  that  shapes  our  ends  draws  His  wisdom 
from  depths  that  we  have  not  fathomed. 

II 

But,  this  method  of  studying  our  subject  gives 
little  more  than  a  preliminary  glance  at  it.  We 
have  been  bestowing  our  attention  on  details  and 
on  methods  of  working;  it  remains  to  examine  the 
movement  as  to  its  fruits.  If  evolution  were 
simply  a  succession  of  states,  or  organisms,  pro- 


112  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

ceeding  one  from  another  by  differentiation, 
without  progress  or  definite  direction  toward  an 
apparent  end,  we  should  have  to  be  satisfied  with 
comments  like  the  above.  But  we  are  not  thus 
limited. 

Since  evolution  is  a  progressive  continuity,  a 
unified  process  of  ever-increasing  complexity,  it 
will  easily  be  seen  that  we  approach  the  problem 
of  God's  benevolence  under  far  more  advantageous 
conditions  than  those  in  which  the  theologians 
of  an  elder  day  found  themselves.  We  are  per- 
mitted to  concentrate  attention  upon  one  main 
issue;  namely,  the  tendencies,  results,  and  impli- 
cations of  the  process  as  a  whole.  "By  their 
fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  Can  we  ascertain 
the  end  toward  which  evolution  seems  to  be 
moving?  Can  we  determine  the  nature  of  the 
highest  product  thus  far  elaborated?  Can  we 
show  this  to  be  an  outcome  of  supreme  worth 
and  of  such  a  nature  that  it  points  to  still  higher 
values?  If  we  can  find  satisfactory  answers  to 
these  questions  we  shall  have  something  sub- 
stantial on  which  to  build  a  conception  of  God's 
character.  We  shall  not  have  to  be  looking  now 
on  this  side  and  now  on  that,  balancing  accounts 
and  wavering  as  we  divide  our  attention  between 
the  two. 

We  are  sometimes  told  that  what  we  here  sug- 
gest is  a  fruitless  or  worse  than  fruitless  quest, 
that  evolution,  of  itself,  gives  us  no  evidence  of 
progress  toward  an  end  of  any  kind,  let  alone  one 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  113 

of  supreme  worth.  But  such  a  judgment  as  this 
can  be  pertinent  only  to  a  purely  outside  view  of 
the  process,  and  if  we  join  the  hopeless  ones  in 
confining  our  induction  to  its  purely  external 
aspects,  we  may  have  to  join  them  also  in  their 
conclusions.  For,  from  such  a  point  of  view, 
evolution  seems  to  be  hardly  more  than  a  great 
dramatic  representation,  full  of  stirring  episodes, 
in  which  human  beings  are,  at  the  same  time,  the 
actors  and  the  spectators.  Now  it  is  a  scene  of 
conflict,  long-drawn-out  and  deadly;  now  it  is 
one  of  peace  that  floweth  like  a  river.  Lofty 
heights  of  feeling  and  achievement  are  reached, 
vistas  of  entrancing  possibilities  are  opened  into 
an  unattainable  future.  Triumph  and  despair, 
love  and  hate,  trust  and  betrayal,  expectation 
and  disappointment,  and  then  the  dropping  of 
the  curtain,  and  darkness.  We  are  told  that  this 
great  process  of  mundane  evolution  cannot  go  on 
indefinitely,  that  it  will  reach  a  culminating  point 
and  then  recede  as  it  has  advanced,  slowing  down 
as  the  rays  from  a  cooling  sun  reach  it  with  an 
ever-decreasing  vitality,  until  the  last  living  thing 
has  disappeared.  From  chaos  unto  chaos,  a 
grand  pageant,  nothing  more. 

But,  thanks  be  to  the  Creator  of  all  things,  we 
are  not  doomed  to  stand  for  ever  gazing  at  the 
external  aspects  of  the  world:  we  are  permitted 
to  enter  and  to  have  its  meaning  explained  to  us. 
In  the  self-consciousness  of  man  we  are  conducted 
straight  into  the  heart  of  things;  we  are  admitted 

8 


114  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

to  the  secrets  of  the  great  world-process.  Man, 
it  is  true,  is  but  one  little  part  of  the  universe. 
But  his  self-knowledge  is  a  door  by  which  he 
gains  admission  to  its  interior.  And  once  in,  there 
is  no  limit  to  his  comprehension  of  problems 
that  would,  otherwise,  be  opaque  for  ever. 

This  unique,  inside  knowledge  of  one  part  of  the 
universe  becomes  to  us  the  key  to  the  whole  of  it. 
Here  all  the  great  concepts  by  which  man  inter- 
prets the  world  have  had  their  origin.  Here  the 
idea  of  cause,  which  philosophers  have  so  vainly 
tried  to  educe  from  external  relations,  came  to  the 
birth.  Only  through  the  knowledge  which  man  has 
of  himself  as  an  originator,  a  modifier  of  events,  has 
he  become  possessed  of  that  concept  that  lies  at 
the  foundation  of  all  science;  namely,  that  of  a 
causative  relation  existing  between  the  events  of 
the  external  world.  Here  also,  from  the  very 
same  experiences  and  by  the  same  process  of 
inference,  has  sprung  the  conception  of  a  great 
and  all-powerful  Creator,  sustaining  to  the  uni- 
verse relations  similar  to  those  which  man  sustains 
to  the  creations  with  which  he  has  surrounded 
himself. 

It  is  here,  again,  that  we  are  made  acquainted 
with  that  special  group  of  instincts  which  together 
constitute  man's  moral  and  religious  nature. 
Gradually,  from  small  beginnings,  dawned  the 
light  of  moral  values,  —  the  faculty  to  discern  in 
actions  a  higher  and  a  lower,  a  better  and  a  worse. 
Here,  in  ever  clearer  outlines,  appeared,  on  the 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  115 

background  of  self-consciousness,  the  vision  of  a 
superior  ideal-self  contrasted  with  its  counterpart, 
the  vision  of  a  degenerate  self;  and  with  the 
vision  a  command  to  achieve  the  one  and  to  escape 
the  other.  Here  arose,  also,  the  instinct  of  wor- 
ship, —  the  instinct  that  voiced  itself  so  wonder- 
fully in  the  ancient  Hebrew  liturgies,  that  men 
have  continued,  through  all  subsequent  ages,  to 
find  in  some  of  them  the  most  satisfactory  ex- 
pression of  the  human  soul.  And  here,  again, 
was  born  that  prophecy  of  a  life  beyond  the  grave, 
in  which  the  illusory  ideals  of  earth's  mirages, 
shall  be  more  than  realized.  With  these  also  we 
must  class  the  whole  outgrowth  of  the  aesthetic 
side  of  man;  the  love  of  all  that  is  beautiful  and 
inspiring,  and  the  creative  impulse  that  urges 
him  to  express  his  love  in  constructions  of  his  own. 

I  have  spoken  of  these  instincts  as  a  unique 
group  that  together  constitute  man's  moral  and 
religious  nature  and,  thus  characterizing  them, 
have  implied  their  organic  unity.  An  organic 
unity  they  certainly  are.  They  can  be  thought 
of  separately,  they  can  be  treated  and  cultivated 
separately;  but  separately  they  are  not  that 
which  we  are  seeking.  All  taken  together,  in 
their  composite  unity,  they  constitute  the  ground 
of  the  highest  product  of  the  world-process  hitherto 
revealed.  They  are  the  nidus  of  the  higher  evolu- 
tion that  is  to  be,  the  vital  germ,  containing  the 
potency  and  promise  of  the  future. 

As  thus  stated  it  is  an  ideal  product,  related  to 


116  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

an  ideal  future.  But  it  is  not  therefore  merely 
a  thing  of  words  and  imaginings.  It  has  a  very 
real  and  concrete  side.  It  is  a  matter  of  acts  and 
experiences.  In  every  age  it  has  been  incarnated 
in  the  lives  of  men  and  women  whose  feet  have  trod 
this  earth,  whose  love  and  devotion  have  gone  out 
to  the  things  of  this  earth  and,  through  them,  to 
the  things  that  are  eternal.  Not  that  we  have 
seen  or  shall  see  all  that  is  shadowed  forth  in  these 
instincts  realized  in  any  individual.  For  if  we 
affirm  perfection  of  any  human  personality,  it  is, 
and  always  must  be,  a  relative  perfection;  relative, 
that  is,  to  the  age  and  society  in  which  that  per- 
sonality is  developed.  It  is  equivalent  to  saying 
that  the  principles,  the  elements,  that  lead  to 
perfection  are  in  this  one  fully  represented,  that 
we  find  here  loyalty  to  all  that  is  highest  in  the 
human  soul.  The  highest  realized  product  is  the 
highest  because,  while  declaring  its  own  incom- 
pleteness, it  points  to  a  further  development  of 
values. 

Now  for  a  deduction.  To  put  it  in  the  simplest 
way:  Is  it  not  a  fair  inference  that  the  Creator's 
character  is  expressed  to  us  in  those  qualities  that 
He  has  made  us,  the  most  highly  developed  of 
His  creatures,  to  recognize  as  the  highest?  When 
we  say  with  the  Psalmist,  "O  come,  let  us  worship 
and  fall  down  and  kneel  before  the  Lord  our 
Maker/'  is  it  the  call  to  an  act  of  adoration  simply 
on  the  ground  that  God  is  the  author  of  our  being? 
Is  it  not  rather  because  morally,  religiously, 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  117 

aesthetically,  He  has  made  us  such  as  we  are, 
beings  so  constituted  that  our  reverence  and  love 
spring  up  spontaneously  toward  certain  qualities? 
because  we  see  in  Him  the  reflection  and  source 
of  whatsoever  things  are  pure,  lovely,  morally  and 
physically  beautiful?  because  we  trace  back  to 
Him,  as  their  author,  all  such  qualities  as  justice, 
mercy,  truth,  and  love?  because  He  has  made  us 
creatures  of  hope  and  aspiration,  has  given  us 
life,  and  with  it  the  potentiality  of  realizing, 
progressively,  all  that  life  prophesies? 

But,  it  may  be  asked,  are  not  those  other 
instincts  also  from  Him  —  those  that  often  antago- 
nize the  uplifting  ones?  Has  He  not  planted  the 
germs  of  passion  and  of  virtue  side  by  side? 
And  while  He  has  made  justice  and  mercy,  loyalty 
and  unselfish  love  adorable,  has  He  not  also  made 
them  most  difficult,  permitting  their  opposites 
so  to  root  themselves  in  our  nature  and  so  domi- 
nate us  with  their  insistence  that  our  vital  energy 
is  often  given  to  them  even  while  our  respect  and 
reverence  go  out  toward  their  rivals?  The  good 
we  approve,  that  we  do  not;  the  evil  we  would 
not,  that  we  do.  Truly,  and  herein  is  revealed  in 
its  clearest  light  the  face  of  the  Author  of  our 
being.  It  declares  most  unmistakably  what  He 
approves  and  what  He  reprobates.  Each  aspect 
of  the  truth  emphasizes  the  other.  We  could  see 
neither  clearly  without  its  opposite. 

But,  more  than  this,  it  is  just  this  moral 
antagonism,  this  war  in  our  members,  that  sup- 


118  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

plies  the  indispensable  condition  of  actual  mo- 
rality. It  is  from  this  that  the  very  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil  springs.  It  is  in  this  that  all 
moral  strength  is  generated  and  all  virtue  of 
whatsoever  description.  The  instincts  that  start 
us  on  the  way  toward  the  love  of  God,  though 
organically  connected  with  the  highest  fruits  of 
evolution,  are  not  themselves  those  fruits.  They 
constitute  the  root-system  of  the  tree  of  life. 
Character  begins  in  them  and,  all  along  its 
course,  is  fostered  by  them.  But  it  is  only 
through  the  antagonisms  of  good  and  evil  in 
the  moral  consciousness  of  man  that  character 
becomes  actual.  Without  the  presence  of  these 
two  principles  of  moral  light  and  darkness,  men 
might  be  morally  sentient,  but  never  morally 
intelligent,  or  morally  efficient,  beings.  Through 
their  conflicting  agency  morality  emerges  from 
the  realm  of  feeling  into  that  of  energizing,  over- 
coming, creating. 

Only  so,  has  sprung  into  being  that  race  of  moral 
heroes,  that  cloud  of  witnesses  in  whom  we  have, 
speaking  reverently,  God  objectified.  God  with 
MS,  testifying  to  the  God  that  is  in  us.  I  say 
speaking  reverently;  for  in  our  inherited  religion 
we  have  been  familiarized  with  the  thought  of 
one  supreme  and  only  incarnation  of  the  Great 
Being  Whom  we  worship.  But  why  should  the 
recognition  of  this  supreme  example  blind  us  to 
the  fact  that  human  history  is  full  of  partial 
incarnations  that  have,  in  different  ways,  contrib- 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  119 

uted  to  the  formation  of  the  highest  ideal  which 
we  worship  as  God?  From  age  to  age  the  process 
has  continued,  a  perennial  and  ever-advancing 
revelation  of  God  in  the  moral  perceptions  and 
inspired  utterances  of  good  men,  and  objectified 
in  their  lives.  This  has  been  and  is  the  law  of 
all  moral  evolution.  All  the  greatness,  all  the 
virtue,  everything  in  human  character  that 
elevates  and  inspires  the  soul  has  entered  and 
established  itself  in  human  consciousness  by  this 
method.  First  the  progressive  illumination  within, 
then  the  progressively  realized  and  substantiated 
achievement  wrought  out  in  actual  life. 

To  thus  extend  the  scope  of  the  principle  of 
incarnation  can  detract  in  no  way  from  the  signifi- 
cance of  its  supreme  example.  On  the  contrary, 
by  removing  that  highest  example  from  the  isola- 
tion of  a  unique,  anomalous  phenomenon  we 
intensify  its  meaning  and  make  its  acceptance, 
as  an  article  of  belief,  not  the  deadlift  of  faith 
in  a  mystery,  but  a  normal  deduction  from  a 
well-defined  law  of  nature.  It  appears  as  the 
continuance  of  God's  method  of  working  in  His 
world.  We  cannot  be  said  to  have  assimilated 
any  fact  of  experience,  or  of  history,  until  we  have 
found  its  place  in  the  hitherto  observed  order  of 
the  world.  To  discover  this  is  its  interpretation, 
its  introduction  and  matriculation  into  the  body 
of  belief  by  which  we  live. 

To  come  back  to  our  argument:  assuming  that 
we  have  determined,  in  outline,  the  highest  prod- 


120  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

uct  of  current  evolution,  and  furthermore  that  we 
have  found  it  to  be  an  outcome  of  suprerne  worth 
pointing  to  the  realization  of  still  higher  values, 
we  may  now  advance  our  hypothesis  to  a  higher 
position.  From  the  status  of  a  weak  herbaceous 
plant  it  has  developed  woody  fibre  and  a  good 
degree  of  stiffness  to  resist  assault.  Its  roots 
have  found  a  strong  hold  in  the  soil  of  human 
experience  and  it  gives  promise  of  a  vigorous 
growth.  But  it  is  not  unassailable,  and  it  is  worth 
our  while  to  forestall  some  of  the  forms  of  contra- 
diction which,  if  well  grounded,  would  cause  it 
to  wither  like  Jonah's  gourd.  It  is  hardly  to  be 
expected  that  we  should  try  to  enumerate  and 
answer  all  the  ways  in  which  our  hypothesis  may 
be  criticized.  But  there  are  two  which,  as  living 
issues,  demand  our  attention. 

Ill 

I  am  assuming  the  following  propositions  to 
be  true.  First,  Evolution  is  an  all-comprehensive 
process.  It  is  not  simply  a  method  by  which  some 
things  have  been  brought  to  pass.  All  things  have 
come  by  it  and  through  it.  Second,  The  fact  that 
man  has  had  an  important  share  in  the  achievement 
of  his  present  moral  status  does  not  obliterate  the 
fact  that  it  is  also  the  work  of  the  God  of  evolution. 

If  the  first  of  these  propositions  is  not  true,  it  is 
clear  that  our  argument  for  the  goodness  of  God 
derived  from  the  moral  nature  of  man  as  the 
highest  product  of  evolution  is  not  conclusive. 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  121 

If,  when  any  part  of  our  experience  seems  to  be 
at  odds  with  the  methods  of  the  great  process  it 
may  be  ruled  out  as  alien  to  it,  the  whole  case  is 
prejudged.  This  is  just  the  attitude  taken,  in 
our  day,  by  a  school  of  thought  that  represents 
much  intellect  and  cultivation.  The  methods  of 
evolution,  it  is  affirmed,  are  throughout  immoral; 
therefore  the  moral  nature  of  man  cannot  be  its 
product.  To  substantiate  this  position  the  un- 
lovely characteristics  of  the  great  process,  up  to 
the  advent  of  morally  enlightened  man,  are  drawn 
for  us  with  the  most  uncompromising  exclusive- 
ness,  leading  to  the  dilemma  of  moral  indifference 
on  the  one  hand,  if  a  presiding  intelligence  is 
postulated,  or,  on  the  other,  to  blind  forces  without 
purpose,  or  consciousness. 

In  contrast  to  this  picture,  man  is  set  before  us  as 
the  beginning  and  the  source  of  all  morality,  of  all 
nobility,  of  everything  that  elevates  and  inspires 
the  soul.  He,  a  being  of  unknown  and  un trace- 
able origin,  is  the  only  thing  of  worth,  or  dignity, 
in  the  world.  He  has  given  birth  to  that  ideal  of 
a  perfect  type  of  being  that  should  dominate  the 
hearts  and  imaginations  of  the  race.  He  is  the 
supreme  reality,  the  all  in  all,  the  final  end  of  our 
strivings,  the  highest  object  of  our  worship.  To 
infer,  from  what  man  is,  the  existence  of  a  being 
of  higher  intelligence,  say  the  Positivists,  is  not 
simply  illegitimate,  it  is  most  harmful,  in  that  it 
withdraws  from  the  cult  of  Humanity  the  zeal 
and  enthusiasm  that  should  be  its  motive  power, 


122  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

But  we  cannot  play  fast  and  loose  with  the  prin- 
ciple of  evolution,  availing  ourselves  of  it  here 
and  excluding  it  there.  To  do  this  would  be  to 
discredit  it  altogether.  In  short,  the  assumption 
of  a  something  independent  of  the  great  process, 
not  concerned  in  it,  takes  issue  with  all  the 
evidence  that  goes  to  support  it.  But,  lest  this 
should  seem  a  too  summary  way  of  dismissing 
the  subject,  let  us  try  to  look  at  the  matter  from 
the  positivist  point  of  view,  and  argue  it  solely 
on  the  ground  of  appearances. 

I  will  ask  the  reader  to  pass  in  review  any  one 
of  the  processes  which,  within  the  sphere  of  his 
experience,  have  led  to  the  most  finished  works 
of  human  creative  ability.  Here,  for  instance,  is 
a  human  abode,  perfect  in  its  adaptations  to  the 
wants  of  the  most  highly  developed  man.  Every- 
thing about  it  and  its  surroundings  expresses 
harmony,  fitness,  restfulness.  Art  and  nature 
have  met  together,  usefulness  and  beauty  have 
kissed  each  other.  In  such  an  abode  every  desire 
is  at  once  met  by  appliances  that  have  anticipated 
it.  Whichever  way  the  eye  turns,  it  is  greeted 
by  some  new  delight. 

Now  let  us  send  our  imaginations  back,  not 
only  along  the  course  of  the  construction  of 
this  one  abode,  but  along  the  many  and  devious 
tracks  by  which  various  co-operating  arts  and 
sciences  have  toiled  and  felt  their  way  toward 
this  consummation.  What  crudity,  what  abor- 
tiveness,  what  failures,  what  unloveliness  of 


GOD'S    BENEVOLENCE  123 

laboratory  and  workshop,  what  dirt  and  daub- 
iness  and  noisome  exhalations,  what  hope  de- 
layed and  heart-breaks  on  the  part  of  the 
human  factors  that  have,  from  first  to  last,  con- 
tributed to  the  result!  What  resemblance  is 
there  between  all  this  incompleteness  and  turmoil 
and  the  harmony  of  the  outcome?  And  if  we  fix 
our  attention  on  all  the  unlovely  aspects  of  the 
antecedent  process,  its  hardships,  its  disappoint- 
ments, its  apparently  fruitless  sacrifices,  quite 
putting  out  of  mind  the  fact  that  it  has  had  also 
its  triumphs,  its  exultations,  its  satisfied  enthusi- 
asms, how  easy  to  see  the  process  as  the  opposite 
of  that  which  it  has  produced! 

I  am  loath  to  suggest  the  absurdity  of  a  sage 
so  transcendently  wise  as  to  propound  the  theory 
that  the  manifest  incongruity  of  these  two,  the 
process  and  the  outcome,  render  quite  impossible 
the  belief  that  the  latter  has  proceeded  from  the 
former.  And  yet  the  hardihood  of  a  philosopher 
who,  in  the  light  of  the  new  revelation  of  an  all- 
embracing  world-process,  can  hope  to  prove  the 
higher  nature  of  man  to  be  outside  and  alien  to  it, 
seems  to  the  writer  to  be  quite  equal  to  such  an 
absurdity.  The  word  prove  is  used  designedly, 
for  the  burden  of  proof  surely  lies  with  those  who 
postulate  such  a  departure  from  the  principle 
of  nature's  uniformity.  The  only  semblance  of 
proof  possible  in  this  case  is  the  alleged  incongruity 
between  the  process  and  the  product.  But  it  is 
the  business  of  science  and  of  philosophy  to  dis- 


124  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

cover  the  underlying  continuity  that  such  apparent 
contradictions  hide  from  us.  Only  by  the  recon- 
ciliation of  facts  seemingly  irreconcilable,  only  by 
patiently  disentangling  that  which  at  first  presents 
itself  as  hopelessly  involved,  by  discovering  rela- 
tions between  things  held  to  be  absolutely  unre- 
lated, has  science  achieved  that  unification  and 
organization  of  our  knowledge  that  we  call  a 
scientific  creed. 

Positivism  with  all  that  calls  itself  Agnosticism, 
as  related  to  our  higher  beliefs,  while  posing  as  the 
advanced  outcome  of  modern  thought  is,  in  fact, 
essentially  archaic.  Its  spirit  is  the  opposite  of 
the  scientific.  It  is  impatient,  assertive,  dogmatic. 
It  declares  questions  closed  on  the  ground  of 
its  emotions.  It  sets  aside  the  law  of  continuity 
as  brusquely  and  confidently  as  any  doctor  of 
theology  with  the  authority  of  the  Church  behind 
him. 

But  it  is  not  at  all  with  the  affirmations  of 
positivism  that  we  have  a  controversy.  It  is  not 
its  positivism  but  its  negativism  that  blocks  the 
way.  So  far  as  its  exaltation  of  man  is  concerned, 
it  is  building  upon  reality.  After  God,  man's 
nature  is  indeed  the  greatest  reality  of  our  experi- 
ence. Taken  in  connection  with  its  outlooks,  its 
far-reaching  prophecies,  it  is  a  reality  of  such 
importance  that  no  exaggeration  of  it  is  to  be 
feared.  But  when  men  address  themselves  to  the 
task  of  defining  its  limitations  from  the  standpoint 
of  what  it  has  been  hitherto,  then  it  is  that  dark- 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  125 

ness  closes  in.  And  when  men  are  so  enamoured 
of  that  which  they  know,  that  they  feel  competent 
to  set  bounds  to  all  further  knowledge,  we  can 
but  recognize  a  phenomenon  with  which  evolution 
has  made  us  familiar;  that  is,  arrested  develop- 
ment. Modern  thought  has  here,  so  to  speak, 
pocketed  itself. 

That  which  a  pragmatic  theology  must  always 
fight  against,  as  true  science  does,  is  the  ten- 
dency to  foreclose  the  situation,  to  raise  the  cry, 
"Thus  far  and  no  farther."  It  is  a  significant 
fact  that  the  so-called  religion  of  positivism  and 
that  form  of  church  religion  that  takes  its  stand 
on  "the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints"  are 
one  in  spirit,  although  the  positions  to  which 
they  irrevocably  commit  themselves  are  as  wide 
apart  as  the  poles. 

I  have  hitherto,  for  argument's  sake,  tacitly 
accepted  the  charge  of  manifest  incongruity 
between  the  moral  nature  of  man  and  the  antece- 
dent course  of  evolution.  But  for  argument's 
sake  only.  I  take  issue  radically  with  that  posi- 
tion, and  that,  not  alone  because  of  faith  in  nature's 
continuity  as  a  general  principle,  but  also  on  the 
strength  of  facts  which  are  already  in  our  posses- 
sion. Looking  back  over  the  way  by  which  we 
have  come,  a  goodly  array  of  analogies  show  us  an 
unmistakable  track  of  continuity,  the  well-defined 
beginnings  of  that  which  has  flowered  forth  in  the 
higher  nature  of  man.  To  develop  more  fully 
this  relatedness,  to  demonstrate  the  unity  of 


126  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

purpose  and  of  method  that  makes  a  straight  story 
of  it  all,  and  to  gather  therefrom  a  far  steadier  and 
clearer  outlook  into  the  probable  future  of  man's 
evolution,  is  one  of  the  great  tasks  of  the  inductive 
theology  of  the  days  that  are  before  us. 

IV 

The  second  proposition  instanced  as  having  a 
vital  bearing  on  our  argument  is  one  of  very  wide 
outlooks  and  can  be  touched  upon  only  briefly 
in  this  connection.  It  was  as  follows:  The  fact 
that  man  has  had  a  share  in  the  achievement  of  his 
present  moral  status  does  not  debar  us  from  tracing 
its  origin  to  God.  Every  product  of  evolution, 
in  so  far  as  it  is  shaped  by  mind,  is  the  result 
of  a  co-operative  activity,  the  joint  work  of  the 
Creator  and  the  creature.  Much  depends  on 
the  faithfulness  and  the  efficiency  of  the  latter, 
but  the  initial  impulse  at  every  upward  step 
of  the  process  and  the  overruling  guidance  that 
shapes  our  ends  can  be  found  nowhere  but  in  the 
Supreme  Intelligence.  This  dual  proposition  is  not 
new,  but  with  evolution  it  has  had  a  new  position 
given  to  it,  a  position  of  central  and  formative 
influence  which  will  make  itself  most  powerfully 
felt  in  the  transformation  and  vitalizing  of  old 
truths. 

No  better  illustration  of  this  could  be  instanced 
than  the  issue  before  us.  The  origin  of  the  moral 
sense  in  man  has  been  an  endlessly  controverted 
question,  and  conclusions  of  vital  importance 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  127 

have  been  assumed  to  flow  from  the  adoption  of 
one  or  the  other  of  the  following  alternatives. 
On  the  one  hand,  it  was  said,  the  moral  sense  is 
intuitive.  It  was  implanted  in  the*  human  soul 
by  the  Creator.  And  on  the  other  hand,  it  was 
affirmed,  the  moral  sense  is  an  outgrowth  of  human 
experience.  It  originated  in  the  smallest  begin- 
nings, the  faintest  glimmerings  of  discernment  as 
regards  moral  values  and  moral  judgments.  If 
the  former  account  of  its  origin  were  justified, 
then,  it  was  held  the  moral  sense  is  authoritative, 
imperious,  divine.  If  the  latter  hypothesis  pre- 
vailed it  was  said  to  be  brought  down  to  the  level 
of  all  those  other  conventions  of  men  that  have 
sprung  up  in  connection  with  the  formation  of 
human  society,  and  therefore  without  implications 
as  regards  a  higher  power. 

Theistic  evolution  brings  this  controversy  to  a 
final  end,  removes  it  absolutely  from  the  realm 
of  living  issues,  and  this,  because  it  makes  it  clear 
as  the  day  that  both  sides  in  the  controversy  have 
the  truth  with  them.  Each  statement,  taken  by 
itself,  is  a  half-truth,  but  altogether  misleading 
in  so  far  as  it  is  exclusive  of  the  other  half.  The 
moral  sense  of  man  can  find  its  origin  .nowhere 
but  in  God,  whose  wisdom  is  the  source  and  effi- 
ciency of  all  this  great  scheme  of  things  of  which 
we  know  the  gradual  becoming.  But  it  has  come 
to  be  what  it  is  only  through  man's  ever-repeated 
responses  and  adjustments  of  himself  to  a  con- 
tinually widening  moral  horizon.  Yet  the  author- 


128  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

ity  of  the  moral  sense  is  no  less  emphatic,  no  less 
categorical  because  it  has  been  thus  gradually 
evolved.  Nor  is  it  any  less  distinctly  from  God 
because  it  has  come  to  be  what  it  is  through  a 
process. 

And  this  brings  into  view  a  principle  of  the 
widest  scope  and  of  great  importance  as  a 
clarifier  of  thought.  Evolution  has  taught  us 
that  the  beginnings  of  things  and  of  ideas,  as  they 
come  into  our  experience,  are  not  significant.  In 
the  past,  whenever  a  belief  was  challenged,  the 
appeal  was  always  to  its  genealogy,  its  origin  in 
human  thought.  Whence  did  it  spring?  Is  it 
a  thing  that  has  grown  into  general  acceptance, 
nobody  knows  how?  Or  does  it  come  with  the 
brand  of  superior  birth  upon  it,  the  prestige  of 
a  great  name  or  a  great  institution  attached 
to  it?  Was  it  noble  and  commanding  from  the 
beginning? 

In  the  light  of  evolution  this  appeal  becomes 
every  day  of  less  and  less  significance;  a  change 
that  might,  at  first  sight,  seem  like  the  reversal  of  a 
deep-seated  mental  habit,  or  even  the  obliteration 
of  an  instinctive  demand  of  the  moral  nature. 
But  no  such  revolution  is  involved.  The  great 
process  does  not  abolish  the  demand  for  credentials. 
It  simply  removes  the  appeal  from  a  God  assumed 
to  have  given  us  finished  products  to  a  God  Who 
has  worked  and  still  works  in  a  not-yet-completed 
world,  through  and  by  the  intelligent  co-operation 
of  His  creatures.  Within  the  realm  of  human 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  129 

origins  the  change  has  indeed  been  revolutionary: 
and  it  came  as  a  shock. 

When  evolution  first  appeared  as  a  new  hypoth- 
esis of  the  creation  of  the  world,  the  one  aspect  of 
it  that  caught  and  held  the  imaginations  of  the 
multitude  was  that  which  affected  our  belief  in 
the  descent  of  man.  Man,  who  had  hitherto 
prided  himself  on  being  the  degenerate  offspring 
of  a  primitive  ancestor  far  superior  to  himself, 
could  not  easily  adjust  his  consciousness  to  the 
fact  of  a  base  ancestry,  from  which  the  race  had 
struggled  upward  very  gradually,  through  the 
tribulation  of  untold  years.  The  manifest  great- 
ness of  the  achievement  weighed  but  little  in  the 
balance  against  the  unwelcome  fact  of  the  humble 
origin.  The  new  derivation  seemed  somehow 
to  involve  contemporary  man  in  the  low  estate 
of  his  far-away  ancestors.  If  he  came  from  the 
lower  animals,  must  not  his  nature  be  one  with 
theirs? 

This,  I  have  said,  was  the  aspect  of  evolution 
that  first  caught  our  imaginations,  but  very  soon 
it  was  seen  that  this  reversal  of  our  idea  of  the 
origin  of  man  was  only  a  sample,  the  forerunner  of 
a  complete  breaking  up  of  our  notions  of  begin- 
nings. Nothing  remained  unaffected  by  it.  The 
highest,  the  most  authoritative,  the  most  wor- 
shipful conceptions  were  seen  to  be  involved 
in  this  novel  theory  of  derivations.  They  must, 
one  and  all,  acknowledge  a  lowly  origin;  and  we 
were  brought  to  recognize  the  fact  that  the  infant 


130  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

born  of  humble  parents  in  a  manger  at  Bethlehem 
was  no  exception  to  the  order  of  becoming  that 
prevails  in  the  world-process. 

Let  it  be  understood  that  I  am  speaking 
only  of  the  insignificance  of  origins  as  they 
appear  in  our  experience.  That  their  littleness 
lies  only  in  our  apprehension  of  them,  is  mani- 
fest enough.  The  greatness  to  which  they  have 
grown,  proclaims  at  the  same  time  the  potency 
that  was  latent  in  them  and  the  greatness  of 
the  intelligence  whence  they  proceeded.  The 
standards  to  which  they  have  led  and  are  leading 
in  the  evolution  of  life  and  thought  are  not  only 
their  credentials  of  truth,  but  also  the  evidence 
of  their  divine  origin. 

This  method  of  reaching  and  holding  a  convic- 
tion of  God's  reality  and  goodness  may  appear  to 
some  as  incapable  of  furnishing  men  with  stable 
beliefs.  It  may  be  said,  If  our  knowledge  of  the 
Supreme  Being  is  the  outcome  of  a  process  not- 
yet-finished,  our  thought  of  Him  must  always  be 
subject  to  change.  It  can  never  be  quite  the 
truth.  The  teachings  of  the  past  were  authorita- 
tive, absolute,  unchangeable.  They  proclaimed 
a  God  "the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  ever." 
But  the  God  declared  in  a  process  is  like  a  cloud  in 
the  sky;  most  beautiful,  perhaps,  but  ever  chang- 
ing its  form.  Who  can  be  sure  that,  in  the  evolu- 
tion of  human  thought  and  feeling,  any  and  every 
conception  of  God  so  formed  will  not,  like  the 
cloud,  pass  away  absolutely?  Such  indeed  may  be 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  131 

the  fate  of  any  particular  image  we  may  form  of 
the  Invisible  One.  The  thoughts  of  Him  that  have 
succeeded  and  displaced  each  other  in  the  human 
mind  are  innumerable  and,  probably,  no  two  per- 
sons have  precisely  the  same  presentiments  with 
regard  to  Him.  But  this  diversity  of  view  is  not 
peculiar  to  the  conception  of  God. 

No  two  persons  see  exactly  the  same  picture 
when  they  look  out  upon  the  external  world  of 
nature,  or  of  social  relations.  But,  with  all  our 
differences,  we  see  it  sufficiently  alike  for  practical 
purposes.  So  with  regard  to  the  world  of  moral 
values;  notwithstanding  great  diversity  in  the 
convictions  of  individuals  and  groups,  there  is  a 
consensus,  a  body  of  fundamental  agreement  to 
which  there  has  been,  through  all  the  ages,  cohe- 
rence and  continuity.  If  our  thought  of  God  is 
rooted  in  these  it  will  have  all  the  stability  that 
is  required,  without  the  rigidity  that  ensures 
destruction  whenever  the  growth-forces  of  evolu- 
tion burst  through  the  artificial  formulas  in  which 
men  have  tried  to  fetter  them.  These  formulas, 
claiming  to  represent  absolute  and  immutable 
truth,  have  been  forged  for  the  very  purpose  of 
counteracting  the  tendency  to  variation  and 
instability.  And  through  seasons  of  spiritual  and 
intellectual  stagnation  they  have  held  their  own, 
like  the  vital  forces  that  slumber  in  seeds  that 
have  been  carefully  kept  out  of  the  reach  of 
vivifying  influences.  But  when,  from  changed 
circumstances,  the  time  of  quickening  comes, 


132  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

the  dead  form  is  cast  off  to  be  no  more  renewed. 
The  day  of  the  stereotyped,  certified  concept  has 
passed.  Its  very  absoluteness  and  rigidity  render 
its  adaptations  to  new  conditions  impossible. 

Clearly,  if  we  would  have  agreement  and  sta- 
bility in  our  thought  of  God  we  must  also  have 
elasticity.  It  must  be  something  in  our  experi- 
ence that  lives,  that  has  grown  with  the  growth 
of  human  thought.  More  often  than  not,  when 
the  old  forms  are  discredited,  those  who  openly 
break  away  from  them  couple  their  denials  with 
affirmations  of  a  reality  that  stands  for  them  in 
the  place  of  a  personal  God.  We  have  such  con- 
fessions of  faith  as,  "  morality  in  the  nature  of 
things,"  "a  stream  of  tendency  that  makes  for 
righteousness,"  or  it  is  the  apotheosis  of  an  ideal- 
ized and  worshipful  humanity.  These  bear  wit- 
ness to  the  vitality  and  the  indestructibility  of 
the  conviction  of  goodness  that  lay  at  the  heart 
of  the  discarded  formula. 

The  affirmations  of  such  unbelievers  are  of  far 
more  significance  than  their  denials;  for  the 
affirmations  are  replete  with  life  and  the  promise 
of  development.  The  denials  have  no  relevancy 
to  the  real  facts  of  the  world.  They  concern  only 
the  forms  into  which  the  belief  in  God  has  been 
temporarily  cast.  The  word  personality  may 
stand  for  the  narrowest  conception  of  embodiment 
in  human  form,  or  it  may  stand  for  the  personality 
of  a  soul,  resembling  the  creative  soul  of  man,  only 
immeasurably  greater,  without  reference  to  form. 


GOD'S   BENEVOLENCE  133 

It  is  not  difficult  to  conceive  that  the  soul  of  a 
great  man  may  survive  his  body  and  enter  upon  a 
sphere  of  activity  immeasurably  wider  than  that 
of  his  earthly  career.  Following  this  idea  we  may 
express  our  thought  of  God  in  some  such  words 
as  these.  He  is  for  each  one  of  us  the  personifica- 
tion of  the  supreme  ideal.  He  is  the  living  reflex 
of  that  which  is  highest  in  the  whole  realm  of 
human  thought  and  imagination. 

Not  that  human  thought  or  human  imagination 
have  ever  taken,  or  can  take,  His  measure.  It  is 
simply  to  say  that  the  highest  conception  of  good 
is,  or  should  be,  at  any  given  time  in  the  history  of 
moral  evolution,  the  God  of  those  who  entertain 
it.  Holding  such  a  conception,  our  thought  will 
always  be  adequate  to  our  need,  and  we  shall 
always  find  room  for  the  new  thought  when  we 
have  grown  up  to  it.  The  stability  and  the 
variability  will  be  those  of  a  growing  body, 
changing  every  day,  but  preserving  its  identity. 
Elements  that  have  outlived  their  usefulness 
disappear,  to  be  replaced  by  other  elements 
that  are  similar  yet  different.  We,  by  intelli- 
gent efforts,  make  our  own  brain-cells,  the  in- 
struments of  our  thought  and  action;  and  they, 
in  turn,  make  us.  So  with  our  conception  of 
God;  we  have  a  large  share  in  determining  its 
form,  and  it,  in  turn,  forms  us. 

But,  observe,  it  is  just  as  true  that  God  forms 
us  and  also  the  human  ideal  by  which  we  climb 
to  a  conception  of  Him.  We  make  God  in  our 


134  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

own  image  because  He  first  made  us  in  His. 
There  is,  it  seems  to  me,  every  reason  to  believe 
that  we  have  reached  a  stage  in  human  evolution 
that  will  put  us  in  possession  of  a  thought  of  God 
far  more  stable,  more  incontrovertible,  more 
restful,  more  sustaining,  more  inspiring,  because 
it  is  a  growing  thought  of  Him  —  one  that  may 
always  be  in  agreement  with  the  growing  advanc- 
ing world  through  which  He  is  ever  revealing 
Himself. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE    MANDATE    OF    EVOLUTION 

WE  may  sum  up    the  results  thus    far 
reached  somewhat  as  follows.    Man's 
knowledge  of  God  depends,  primarily, 
upon  his  knowledge  of  himself.     Its  initial  stage 
was  the  reflex  of  man's  dawning  self-consciousness, 
and  with  the  deepening  of  his  moral  insight  and 
the  widening  of  his  intellectual  horizon  it  has  ever 
grown  broader  and  deeper. 

But,  this  is  not  the  only  source  of  our  knowledge 
of  God.  The  great  world  of  things  which  forms 
our  environment  also  expresses  God,  though  not 
so  directly  and  intimately  as  the  human  soul 
which  interprets  it.  Both  are  from  Him;  each 
throws  light  upon  the  other  and  upon  their  com- 
mon author.  These  three,  man,  nature,  God, 
hang  together  and  in  their  living  relations  con- 
stitute our  knowledge  of  that  which  is.  No  one 
of  these  elements  can  be  said  to  be  real  if  regarded 
out  of  relation  to  the  other  two.  Theology  is  an 
abstract,  bloodless  science  unless  studied  through 
our  knowledge  of  man  and  nature.  Man  is  an 
incomprehensible  fragment  of  reality  except  as  he 
is  studied  in  relation  to  God  and  God's  world  in 

135 


136  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

which  he  finds  himself.  Nature  is  meaningless 
until  a  humanly  revealed  God  is  recognized  as 
its  indwelling  principle.  Theology,  then,  may  be 
said  to  be  the  explication  of  that  factor  in  the 
world's  history  which,  while  it  is  distinct  both 
from  nature  and  from  man,  profoundly  influences 
both.  It  is  a  progressive  science  to  which  every 
part  of  our  knowledge  is  germane.  And  since  God 
and  man  and  nature  are  involved  in  one  great 
process,  we  must  seek  and  expect  to  find  general 
principles  that  hold  throughout. 

Our  study  of  evolution  from  the  outside  brought 
us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  animated  world  is 
essentially  the  outcome  of  co-operative  agencies, 
of  a  supreme  intelligence  working  in  and  with 
its  creatures,  constraining  them  to  multiform 
activities  which  contribute  not  alone  to  their 
immediate  advantage,  but  which  also,  through 
the  persistence  of  co-operation,  carry  them  to 
an  advanced  place  on  the  scale  of  being.  By 
the  study  of  the  same  process  from  within  we 
were  able  to  reach,  through  the  facts  of  man's 
moral  constitution,  some  important  deductions  as 
to  the  character  of  God.  Man's  moral  and  aes- 
thetic discernments,  the  innate  sense  of  obligation 
accompanying  these,  his  instinctive  desire  to  know 
and  to  worship  a  being  higher  and  better  than 
himself,  and  in  general  his  idealizing  faculty, 
were  instanced  as  evidences  of  the  beneficence  of 
the  Being  whom  he  calls  his  Maker.  This  is  the 
beginning,  the  rudiments  of  an  argument  that  we 


THE    MANDATE    OF    EVOLUTION          137 

must  now  follow  out  through  many  departments 
of  experience. 


Hitherto,  we  have  been  regarding  life  in  its 
static  aspect,  we  have  arrested  its  flow  to  make 
investigation  of  its  essential  characteristics;  or,  in 
other  words,  we  have  examined  the  fruits  of  evo- 
lution. Now,  we  must  return  to  the  consideration 
of  the  not-yet-finished  process  and  investigate  the 
living,  never-ceasing  stream  of  influences  that  work 
within  and  without  us.  The  study  of  these  ought 
to  furnish  us  with  a  progressive  knowledge  of  what 
God  is  doing,  as  the  former  examination  acquainted 
us  with  a  knowledge  of  what  He  has  done.  For 
evolution  implies  a  God  Who  is  still  creating,  Who 
is  now  engaged  in  a  most  significant  part  of  the 
process,  and  also  a  God  Who  has  taken  man  into 
partnership. 

The  influences  that  work  within  us  divide 
themselves  naturally  into  two  classes.  First, 
those  that  are  intimately  bound  up  with  our  own 
personality,  that  seem  to  arise  from  a  spontaneous 
initiative  out  of  the  depths  of  our  inherited  and 
acquired  constitutions;  and  second,  those  that 
seem  to  visit  us,  like  ministering  angels,  from  some 
power  not  ourselves.  To  the  first  class  belong  all 
those  inward  propulsions  toward  certain  more  or 
less  definite  lines  of  action  which  we  call  instincts. 
They  are  the  master  motives  of  our  lives,  and  some 
of  them  date  back  their  origin  to  the  very  begin- 


138  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

nings  of  organization.  Others  have  manifestly 
emerged  high  up  on  the  scale,  but  all  of  them  are 
influences  that  are  subject  to  modification.  The 
oldest  and  most  persistent,  as  well  as  the  later,  are 
open  to  innumerable  transformations. 

It  has  been  said  that  man  is  a  bundle  of  in- 
stincts. But  it  is  quite  as  true  that  these  instincts 
are  continually  adjusting  and  readjusting  them- 
selves to  new  conditions,  exhibiting,  now  on  this 
side  and  now  on  that,  adaptations  and  activities 
hitherto  unknown.  The  most  interesting  and 
vitally  important  of  these  adjustments  are  those 
which  obtain  in  view  of  the  direct  efforts  of  the 
human  will. 

The  individual  has  immense  power  over  his 
inherited  instincts.  It  is  for  him  to  say  which 
shall  hold  the  places  of  honour  and  power  in  his 
life  and  which  shall  be  subordinate  and  tributary. 
Not  those  which  he  finds  seated  in  the  place  of 
leadership  are  necessarily  to  remain  in  that  posi- 
tion, The  appointing  power  is  his,  if  so  be  he  has 
the  strength  of  will  to  exercise  it.  By  the  per- 
sistent application  of  will  power  he  may  organize 
his  inherited  instincts  into  a  government  of  related 
habits  that  transform  him  from  a  bundle  of 
instincts  into  a  human  personality  of  established 
character  —  an  organic,  serviceable  unity,  not  a 
mere  aggregation.  Not  that  this  is  the  only 
source  of  variation  of  instinct.  In  human  beings 
the  inheritance  that  comes  to  each  individual  has 
been  already  profoundly  modified  in  his  ancestors. 


THE   MANDATE   OF   EVOLUTION          139 

But  before  following  out  this  most  important 
question  of  modifications,  let  us  glance  for  a 
moment  at  the  derivation  of  the  motive  powers 
which  collectively  we  call  instinct.  We  have  said 
that  it  comes  to  us  by  inheritance;  but  let  us  not 
be  deceived  into  thinking  that  we  have  explained 
the  origin  of  instinct  when  we  have  dignified  a  mere 
transmitting  agency  with  the  name  "  principle  of 
heredity."  Not  one  ray  of  light  does  this  principle 
of  heredity  throw  upon  the  origin  of  the  guiding 
influences  that  have  worked  the  works  of  intelli- 
gence for  the  animated  creation. 

In  our  analogical  interpretation  of  evolution 
we  found  it  necessary  to  postulate  two  sources  of 
intelligence,  that  of  the  Creator  and  that  of  the 
creature.  Everywhere  the  study  of  nature,  as 
well  as  of  human  experience,  discloses  a  sharing 
of  responsibility  between  these  two  intelligent 
factors.  And  furthermore,  it  discloses  a  contin- 
ual change  in  the  proportions  of  the  responsibil- 
ity resting  upon  each.  The  principle  seems  to  be 
that  just  so  much  of  the  management  of  its  own 
affairs  as  it  is  equal  to,  is  laid  upon  the  creature. 
This,  combined  with  the  recognition  of  the  fact 
that  man,  notwithstanding  his  increased  intel- 
lectual endowments,  is  still  very  largely  dependent 
upon  instinct,  has  opened  our  eyes  to  the  con- 
tinuity of  the  great  process  as  nothing  else  could 
have  done.  And  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  principle 
of  continuity  declares  itself  an  invaluable  ally  to  a 
sound  theory. 


140  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

The  old  conception  of  instinct,  that  it  was,  in 
the  animals  below  man,  the  only  guide  to  action, 
the  only  substitute  for  intelligence,  and  conversely, 
that  in  man,  government  by  instinct  recedes  to  a 
vanishing  point,  was,  in  its  theological  bearings,  an 
error  of  far-reaching  consequences.  It  was  an  idea 
that  most  effectually  isolated  man.  The  animals 
below  man  were  still  the  wards  of  the  Creator.  He 
did  their  thinking  for  them.  But  man,  having  been 
endowed  with  intelligence,  was  set  off  to  shift  for 
himself,  and,  according  to  the  old  theology,  he 
had  so  abused  his  liberty  that  he  had  become  an 
outcast,  a  repudiated  part  of  the  great  family. 
But,  by  the  recognition  of  the  persistence  of 
instinct  through  all  stages  of  the  great  process, 
God  is  known  as  an  ever-present  factor  in  the 
life  of  man;  and  as  our  knowledge  of  the  condi- 
tions under  which  we  live  increases,  the  more  we 
are  obliged  to  expand  our  thought  of  an  intelligence 
working  with  us  that  is  not  our  intelligence,  but 
that  of  a  Being  immeasurably  superior. 

And  when,  looking  in  the  other  direction,  we 
push,  by  the  aid  of  the  microscope,  our  investi- 
gations back  to  the  simplest  beginnings  of  ani- 
mated life,  we  find  no  break  in  the  continuity, 
only  a  progressive  change  in  the  proportional 
efficiency  of  the  two  intelligent  factors.  The 
farther  back  we  go,  the  more  difficult  does  it 
become  to  trace  indications  of  intelligence  on  the 
part  of  the  creature.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  it 
is  just  here  that  we  encounter  the  most  impressive 


THE   MANDATE   OF   EVOLUTION          141 

instances  of  apparent  clairvoyance  as  related  to 
future  requirements. 

In  the  development  of  the  egg  from  the  single 
nucleated  cell,  through  the  successive  stages  of  the 
multiplication  and  differentiation  of  cells,  we  have 
an  epitome  of  the  history  of  creation  through  its 
myriad  forms  of  ever-increasing  complexity.  In  no 
part  of  the  whole  process  is  the  foresight  of  condi- 
tions and  requirements  lying  in  the  far-away  future 
so  wonderfully  evidenced  as  in  those  which  lie 
nearest  to  the  beginning.  Or,  if  we  confine  our 
attention  to  a  single  instance  of  passing  from  a 
given  form  of  established  organized  life  to  the  one 
next  above  it,  the  evidence  of  intelligent  foresight, 
of  the  clear  understanding  of  future  necessities,  and 
of  provision  to  meet  them  is  simply  coercive  in  its 
implication. 

As  we  have  said,  many  of  our  instincts  date 
back  to  the  very  beginnings  of  organized  life. 
But  there  are  many  others  that  have  made  their 
appearance  only  since  the  advent  of  human  life, 
and  they  have  been  introduced  into  the  order  of 
that  life  by  the  initiative  of  a  higher  intelligence, 
as  clearly  as  any  of  the  more  rudimentary  ones. 
Some  of  these  are  coercive,  some  are  of  the  nature 
of  inclinations,  solicitations.  They  are  not  de- 
veloped in  the  same  measure  in  all  the  individuals 
of  the  race.  Some  of  the  most  masterful,  like  the 
instinct  for  self-realization,  is  very  feebly  devel- 
oped in  many,  and  may  be  easily  discouraged  in  a 
vast  number. 


142  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

These  more  recently  developed  instincts  being 
very  much  subject  to  our  control  and  dependent 
on  our  wills  for  their  development,  are  related  to 
our  destinies  something  as  are  the  forces  of  nature 
in  the  midst  of  which  we  find  ourselves.  They  are 
great  motive  powers,  full  of  possibilities  for  the 
expansion  and  perfection  of  human  life.  But  with- 
out effort  on  the  part  of  those  in  whom  they  make 
their  appearance,  they  run  to  waste.  When  that 
effort  of  the  individual  is  supplied,  there  is  experi- 
enced in  response  to  it  an  additional  and  gratuitous 
assistance  from  an  intelligence  not  ours,  supple- 
menting ours,  and  carrying  it  and  our  effort  to 
issues  beyond  our  expectations.  This  assisting, 
supplemental  intelligence  is  illustrated  in  every 
invention,  in  every  great  poetical  and  musical 
composition,  in  constructive  triumphs  of  every 
kind  that  have  been  reached  by  the  overcoming 
of  difficulties.  Let  us  observe  what  happens  in 
such  cases. 

The  inventor  or  the  composer  enters  upon  his 
task  with  only  the  vaguest  notion  of  what  he  is 
about  to  do.  A  more  or  less  defined  requirement 
of  life  is  to  be  provided  for,  or  some  new  form  of 
expression  of  dimly  understood  thoughts  or  emo- 
tions is  to  be  created;  and  he  has  within  him 
an  instinctive  feeling  that  he  is  called  to  achieve 
this  particular  thing.  He  first  brings  his  will  to 
bear  by  concentrating  his  attention.  His  memory 
of  past  experiences  comes  to  his  aid.  It  suggests 
how  similar  situations  have  been  met,  and  thus 


THE   MANDATE    OF   EVOLUTION          143 

supplies  materials.  A  constructive  tendency  of 
mind,  which  has  perhaps  been  trained  into  a  habit, 
carries  him  on  its  unnoticed  current.  And  some- 
how, in  obedience  to  these  combined  influences,  a 
mystery  of  mysteries  takes  place.  The  nerve- 
cells  of  his  brain  organize  themselves  in  elaborate 
and  often  absolutely  new  combinations,  which 
present  themselves  to  his  critical  judgment  in  the 
form  of  ideas. 

These  we  will  say  are  only  partially  satisfactory. 
They  are  not  in  all  respects  what  he  wants.  But, 
these  reports  have  given  him  a  far  clearer  notion 
of  what  he  does  want.  The  vagueness  is  in  a 
measure  disappearing.  The  requirements  are, 
so  to  speak,  sent  back  to  the  brain  restated. 
Progress  has  been  made,  a  new  combination  of 
nerve-cells  is  formed  and  again  reported.  It  is 
as  if  the  governor  of  a  partially  developed  country, 
impressed  with  the  necessity  of  improvements  in 
certain  directions,  and  with  some  general  notions 
of  what  these  should  be,  called  to  his  aid  a  special- 
ist. Laying  before  him  the  outline  of  the  situa- 
tion to  be  met,  and  his  general  scheme  with  regard 
to  it,  he  submits  to  him  the  working  out  of  the 
problem  and  the  filling  in  of  details. 

In  other  words,  our  invariable  experience,  in  all 
such  cases,  points  to  the  existence  of  an  intelli- 
gence-not-ours  that  co-operates  with  ours  and 
supplements  it.  Our  intelligence,  our  will-power, 
our  critical  judgment,  and  our  persistence  are 
most  important  factors  in  the  constructive  work, 


144  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

but  they  would  accomplish  nothing  without  the 
co-operation  of  that  other  intelligent  agent,  who 
is  more  closely  in  touch  with  the  secrets  of  being 
than  we  are. 

It  is  needless  for  us  to  distress  ourselves,  in 
this  connection,  with  the  thought  of  our  littleness 
and  insignificance  as  compared  with  the  Supreme 
Ruler  of  the  universe.  Though  we  trace  the 
assistance  of  which  we  are  conscious,  in  the  last 
result,  to  Him,  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should 
conceive  the  administration  of  His  great  realm 
of  spirit  to  be  organized  on  principles  radically 
different  from  those  which  obtain  in  human 
governments.  On  the  contrary,  there  is  every 
reason  why  we  should  assume  a  hierarchy  of 
spiritual  agents  in  a  world  where  the  hierarchical 
principle  is  so  broadly  and  variously  exemplified. 

The  conception  of  a  God  Who  acts  everywhere 
and  directly  in  all  the  details  of  the  universe 
without  intermediate  agencies  is  not  only  crude 
and  cumbersome,  but  without  analogical  support 
from  any  experience  of  ours.  While,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  alternative  conception  of  a  God 
Who  is  served  by  an  innumerable  host  of  subordi- 
nates, each  in  some  particular  position  of  trust, 
quite  corresponds  with  what  we  know  of  the 
possibilities  of  mind,  and  in  no  way  opens  the 
door  to  polytheistic  constructions.  It  is  perhaps 
wisely  ordered  that  we  should  have  no  definite 
knowledge  of  these  subordinate  agents,  lest,  cap- 
tured by  them,  our  imaginations  should  fail 


THE   MANDATE   OF   EVOLUTION          145 

to  rise  in  recognition  and  worship  to  the  one 
source  of  all  power,  wisdom,  and  love. 

II 

Now,  let  us  ask,  are  we  able  to  state  in  a  few 
words  the  principles  of  which  the  above  considera- 
tions are  the  expression?  Is  it  possible  to  com- 
press them  into  a  formula  which  we  can  carry 
with  us  as  a  talisman  through  all  the  vicissitudes 
of  life?  At  first  sight  it  would  seem  as  if  the 
difficulties  to  be  overcome  were  almost  insur- 
mountable. Such  a  formula  must  be  the  state- 
ment of  a  dual  agency,  expressed  hi  terms  of 
God  and  man.  It  must  take  a  paradoxical  form, 
because  each  side  of  it  must  be  as  clearly  defined 
and  as  strongly  emphasized  as  if  it  constituted 
the  whole.  But,  we  are  spared  the  necessity  of 
invention,  for  hi  the  ancient  repository  of  our 
inherited  wisdom  we  find  a  form  that,  with  its 
rust  knocked  off,  will  admirably  serve  our  needs. 
It  is  this:  "WORK  OUT  YOUR  OWN  SAL- 
VATION. IT  IS  GOD  THAT  WORKETH 
IN  YOU." 

Like  a  dormant  seed,  this  formula  of  twelve 
words  has  been  slumbering  through  the  Christian 
centuries  till  a  congenial  soil  should  be  prepared 
for  it.  It  contains  in  itself  a  whole  theology. 
When,  under  a  different  figure,  I  spoke  of  knocking 
off  its  rust,  the  reference  was  to  the  very  unsatis- 
factory state  in  which  we  find  the  word  salvation. 
To  some  extent  in  theological  constructions,  and 
10 


146  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

largely  in  popular  thought,  this  word  has  in  the 
past  taken  on  a  specialized  meaning.  Through 
long  ages  it  has  meant  escape,  in  a  future  life,  from 
the  penal  consequences  of  earthly  misdemeanours. 
Men  thought  of  it  only  as  exemption  from  physical 
or  mental  punishment  for  their  sins.  It  seemed 
to  them  a  condition  not  flowing  directly  and  neces- 
sarily from  the  natures  they  might  have  formed  for 
themselves,  but  a  sentence  pronounced  upon  them 
from  an  outside  source,  a  doom  that  might  be  es- 
caped in  something  the  same  way  that  penalties 
are  escaped  on  earth  by  bribing  the  judge. 

A  very  different  view  of  salvation  is  set  before 
us  by  the  processes  of  nature.  Here  is  an  egg. 
It  makes,  to  the  eye,  no  declaration  of  what  it 
can  do;  yet  we  know  from  experience  that  its 
possibilities  are  very  great.  But  we  know  also 
from  experience  that  the  realization  of  these  pos- 
sibilities is  conditional.  It  is  a  most  perishable 
thing.  Only  a  few  of  the  countless  millions  of 
eggs  that  are  produced  are  ever  anything  more 
than  eggs.  Now  salvation,  as  applied  to  an  egg, 
may  mean  a  variety  of  things.  It  may  mean 
escape  from  being  devoured  as  food;  it  may 
survive  the  chances  of  neglect;  it  may  pass 
safely  through  the  first  stages  of  incubation  or 
all  the  stages.  But  none  of  these  escapes  con- 
stitutes, in  the  largest  sense,  salvation.  That  is 
fully  realized  only  when  it  has  passed  through  all 
the  successive  stages  of  its  normal  becoming  to 
the  maturity  of  the  organism  that  it  is  fitted  to 


THE    MANDATE    OF   EVOLUTION          147 

become.  The  same  is  true  of  every  kind  of  germ- 
life,  souls  included. 

In  the  case  of  souls,  it  is  true,  the  problem  is  a 
thousand  times  more  complicated,  but  the  prin- 
ciple is  the  same.  The  salvation  of  a  soul  is  the 
full  and  progressive  realization  of  the  highest 
things  possible  to  it.  Creation  and  salvation  are 
therefore  cognate  terms.  We  might  even  say 
that  in  principle  they  are  synonymous.  If  we 
associate  the  word  creation  with  the  beginning  of 
a  process,  salvation  is  the  continuance  of  it,  — 
its  rescue,  at  every  successive  step,  from  destruc- 
tion. Evolution  gives  us  a  scientific  phrase  for 
this  kind  of  salvation  which  has  a  startling, 
though  unintentional,  resemblance  to  the  phrase- 
ology of  the  originator  of  Christianity.  The 
scientific  word  is  survival.  The  phrase  of  the 
religious  teacher  is  eternal  life}  escape  from  death 
by  the  continuation  of  the  process  that  has 
brought  it  into  being.  Salvation,  then,  is  the 
rescue  not  only  of  a  soul,  but  also  of  a  process 
from  premature  ending,  or  misdirection. 

With  this  understanding  of  the  word  salvation 
I  return  to  the  statement  that  our  formula  con- 
tains within  itself  a  whole  theology.  I  believe 
it  is  capable  of  furnishing  us  with  the  foundations 
of  an  eminently  symmetrical,  evenly  balanced 
theology.  It  sets  before  us,  in  one  comprehensive 
view,  the  agency  of  the  two  great  factors  in  theo- 
logical thought,  emphasizes  them  equally,  and 
exhibits  their  vital  relations  to  each  other.  It 


148  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

should  give  us,  moreover,  a  coherent  theology. 
For  although  its  statement  is  paradoxical,  sug- 
gesting almost  a  contradiction,  this  appearance 
of  contrariety  vanishes  upon  its  application.  And, 
since  it  is  not  the  outcome  of  the  dissection  of 
our  concrete,  real  knowledge,  but  a  deliverance 
in  terms  of  actuality,  it  can  always  be  submitted 
to  this  test  of  application  by  the  attempt  to  live 
it.  Whatever  superstructure  is  built  upon  it  may, 
or  rather  must,  be  referred  to  the  facts  of  human 
experience  for  approval :  and  its  constructions  are 
always  open  to  correction  from  the  standpoint  of 
our  ever-expanding  knowledge. 

It  is,  furthermore,  capable  of  giving  us  a  work- 
able theology,  because  it  is  expressed  in  terms  of 
action.  It  sets  out,  not  by  telling  us  in  elaborate 
definitions  what  God  necessarily  must  be,  not  by 
defining,  on  the  side  of  man,  the  characteristics 
of  his  moral  constitution  and  the  relations  in 
which  he  stands  to  a  God  abstractly  set  forth, 
but  it  tells  us,  in  no  hesitating  words,  what  God 
does  in  His  world  and  what  man  has  to  do. 

That  this  great  and  pregnant  formula  should 
have  lain  dormant  so  long  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at  when  we  consider  its  relations  to  some  of  the 
doctrines  which  have  through  the  ages  held  sway 
in  the  church.  In  one  form  or  another,  it  is 
true,  both  clauses  of  our  formula  were  recog- 
nized by  the  Church  of  Rome.  Under  its  own 
supervision,  it  fostered  the  first  as  a  vital  prin- 
ciple in  the  government  of  men.  The  activities 


THE    MANDATE    OF   EVOLUTION          149 

which  it  prescribed  for  working  out  one's  own 
salvation  were  various,  but  they  admit  of  clas- 
sification in  two  kinds  which,  to  some  extent, 
overlap  each  other. 

On  the  one  hand  there  was  the  conception  of  a 
salvation  to  be  purchased  by  the  conciliation  of  an 
offended  God.  This,  the  survival  of  a  very  ancient 
form  of  belief  that  expressed  itself  through  all  the 
phases  of  paganism  in  sacrifices,  has  held  its  own 
to  some  extent  in  nearly  every  form  of  organized 
Christianity.  True,  the  one  great  sacrifice  had 
been  substituted  for  the  many.  By  that,  God  was 
said  to  have  been  propitiated  and  the  demands 
of  justice,  once  for  all,  satisfied.  But,  between  the 
realization  of  the  benefits  acquired  by  this  and 
the  devout  Catholic,  there  extends  the  indefinite 
vista  of  purgatorial  punishments,  and  the  reduc- 
tion of  these  has  always  been  an  incentive  to  the 
working  out  of  what  appeals  to  the  imagination 
as  a  very  real  salvation. 

But  the  methods  prescribed  contemplated  out- 
ward activities  rather  than  inward  changes.  It 
was  a  salvation  to  be  purchased,  an  indebtedness 
to  be  worked  off,  a  definite  amount  of  punish- 
ment due,  to  be  proportionately  reduced  by 
charities,  by  mortifications,  or  by  the  payment  of 
money  for  special  intercessions  on  the  part  of  the 
church. 

In  contrast  to  this,  though  sometimes  combined 
with  it,  was  a  conception  of  salvation  and  a 
method  of  securing  it  much  nearer  to  that  taught 


150  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

by  evolution.  It  was  nearer  in  that  the  salva- 
tion, laboured  for,  was  to  be  achieved,  not  by  a 
change  in  the  attitude  of  another  being,  but  in 
the  disposition  and  characteristics  of  the  indi- 
vidual to  be  saved.  Asceticism,  in  so  far  as  its 
motive  was  the  subjugation  of  the  natural  man 
and  the  achievement  of  a  higher  personality,  was 
vitally  in  touch  with  the  morality  of  our  day. 
But  it  was  radically  different  both  in  its  concep- 
tion of  the  personality  to  be  worked  for  and  in 
its  methods.  These  latter,  as  essentially  negative 
and  destructive,  were  the  reverse  of  those  of  an 
evolutional  morality,  which  are  constructive  and 
progressive,  and  only  in  a  subsidiary  way,  repres- 
sive. The  ruling  principle  of  asceticism  was 
depletion,  the  getting  rid  of  life's  natural  exuber- 
ance, which  was  assumed  to  be  incompatible  with 
the  ascendancy  of  the  spiritual  part  of  man: 
fastings  and  vigils,  the  neglect  of  cleanliness  and 
the  ordinary  laws  of  health,  the  closing  of  all  the 
avenues  of  mental  stimulation  and  growth,  in 
short,  the  virtual  suppression  of  the  whole  being 
for  the  elimination  of  the  evil  incidental  to  its 
natural  activities. 

The  ruling  principle  of  evolution,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  nutrition,  the  building  up  and  strengthen- 
ing of  every  faculty,  the  fostering  of  every  interest 
that  promises  an  increase  of  life,  and  then,  the  use 
of  this  accumulated  power  for  the  control  of  the 
whole  man  and  for  the  development  of  the  interest 
which  declares  itself  to  be  the  highest. 


THE    MANDATE    OF   EVOLUTION          151 

Asceticism  found  a  warrant  for  its  ideals  and 
methods  in  some  of  the  sayings  of  Our  Lord  which, 
taken  by  themselves,  seem  to  be  its  endorsement. 
But  it  is  much  more  ancient  than  Christianity.  It 
is  a  natural  growth  of  the  human  soul  becoming 
conscious  of  itself  and  of  the  warring  elements 
that  contend  within  it  for  the  mastery.  It  has 
its  grand  qualities  notwithstanding  its  mistaken 
ideals  and  methods.  In  its  recognition  of  a 
better  self  to  be  worked  for,  of  a  warfare  to  be 
waged,  of  a  degradation  to  be  escaped,  it  was  the 
expression  of  instincts  that  are  the  spring  of  all 
higher  moral  evolution  and  salvation.  But  as  it 
was  a  fight  against  nature,  a  reversal  of  the  law  of 
constructive  evolution,  it  was  doomed  to  failure; 
and  the  demonstration  of  its  practical  futility 
helped  to  bring  discredit  on  any  and  every  attempt 
to  work  out  one's  own  salvation. 

Theoretically,  Protestant  orthodoxy  excluded 
our  formula  more  absolutely  than  Roman.  Its 
substitution  of  salvation  by  faith  for  that  of 
prescribed  works,  its  doctrine  of  inability,  elec- 
tion, etc.,  seemed  to  leave  no  room  for  the  practice 
of  the  first  half  of  it.  But,  the  exigencies  of  the 
actual  dominated  the  situation.  Militant  Prot- 
estantism, forced  to  work  out  its  immediate  salva- 
tion in  the  midst  of  a  hostile  environment,  was 
in  little  danger  of  losing  its  virility  by  reposing  on 
a  theoretical  salvation  that  had  been,  or  was  to 
be,  worked  out  for  it.  ''  Trust  in  God  and  keep 
your  powder  dry"  was  its  motto.  The  removal 


152  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  the  barrier  of  the  church  had,  moreover,  brought 
men  face  to  face  with  the  fact  of  God.  And  the 
men  of  the  early  days  of  Protestantism  felt  God, 
and  knew  God  working  in  them,  with  an  intensity 
proportioned  to  the  conviction  that  they  were  His 
chosen  instruments  for  the  execution  of  a  great 
work. 

And  again,  the  Protestantism  of  that  day  was 
strongly  tinctured  with  the  spirit  of  asceticism. 
The  subjugation  of  self  through  the  suppression 
of  natural  instincts,  the  banishment  of  joy  and 
of  much  that  ministers  to  the  sense  of  beauty  and 
the  refinements  of  life,  were  in  the  line  of  working 
out  an  impoverished  kind  of  salvation;  and  a 
salvation  it  was  to  many  souls.  For,  though 
pursued  in  defiance  of  theology  and  under  the 
inspiration  of  inadequate  and  often  misleading 
ideals,  it  was  heroic  work  accompanied  by  a  con- 
viction of  the  approval  of  a  righteous  and  all- 
seeing  God.  The  appointments  of  man  might  do 
much  to  thwart,  but  they  could  not  prevent  the 
grace  of  God  from  working  out  salvation  in 
response  to  the  sincere  efforts  of  his  creatures. 

Protests  against  the  traditional  theology  were 
made  now  and  again ;  and  the  first  clause  of  our 
formula  was  emphasized  by  dissenting  bodies  as 
the  expression  of  the  only  true  way  of  salvation. 
But  the  strength  of  such  movements  was  largely 
absorbed  in  negations,  in  protests  against  the 
assumptions  of  the  old,  rather  than  in  whole- 
souled  efforts  to  frame  an  affirmative  doctrine 


THE    MANDATE    OF   EVOLUTION         153 

that  should  be  a  constructive  power  in  the  hearts 
and  lives  of  men.  The  time  had  not  come  for 
such  a  reconstruction.  But,  we  can  see  how  these 
critical  protests  were  preparing  the  way  for  it 
when  the  history  of  the  world  should  have  become 
transformed  in  the  light  of  evolution. 

The  doctrines  of  our  inherited  theology  were, 
in  great  measure,  the  counterparts  of  the  condi- 
tions in  which  they  originated.  The  expansion  of 
those  conditions  not  only  cleared  the  way  for, 
but  necessitated  a  like  expansion  in  theology. 
The  change  required  was  much  like  that  which 
characterized  the  passing  of  the  crude  science  of 
the  Middle  Ages  with  its  alchemy  and  its  as- 
trology, its  mixture  of  fact  and  superstition,  into 
the  modern  science  of  research,  inference,  and 
verification. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

WORK    OUT    YOUR    OWN    SALVATION 

HAVING  made  the  assumption  that  our 
formula,  "Work  out  your  own  salva- 
tion, it  is  God  that  worketh  in  you," 
is  a  comprehensive  expression  of  the  religious 
content  of  evolution,  we  must  now  see  if  it  will 
stand  the  test  of  our  method.  At  this  stage  in 
the  discussion  we  hold  it  only  as  a  working 
hypothesis.  We  must  proceed  to  make  applica- 
tions of  it,  now  on  this  side  and  now  on  that,  to 
the  actualities  of  experience.  So  doing  we  shall 
progressively  establish  its  truth,  if  it  be  true, 
and  at  the  same  time  instruct  ourselves  as  to  the 
possibility  and  means  of  a  satisfactory  realization 
of  it. 

Hitherto,  for  the  sake  of  exhibiting  it  as  an 
integral  truth,  we  have  glanced  alternately  at 
the  contrasted  sides  of  its  dual  reality.  In  what 
follows  I  will  ask  the  reader  to  follow  me  in  a 
closer  and  longer  look  at  the  first  clause  of  it. 
"Work  out  your  own  salvation."  If  we  give 
ourselves  time  to  take  in  the  full  meaning  of  this 
appeal  it  will  carry  us  right  into  the  heart  of  life's 
most  urgent  problems.  One  of  these,  the  ques- 

154 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN    SALVATION     155 

tion  of  its  morality,  its  relation  to  the  exhortation, 
"Live  for  others/'  I  will  not  enter  upon  now,  as 
we  shall  meet  it  at  a  subsequent  stage  of  the 
discussion. 

First,  let  us  give  attention  to  the  similarity 
of  the  first  clause  of  our  formula  to  that  phrase 
which  expresses,  in  the  most  succinct  form,  the 
motive  power  of  all  evolution,  —  "The  struggle 
for  existence. "  The  resemblance  between  the 
two  is  such  as  to  suggest  identity,  and  this  sug- 
gestion has  been  responsible  for  two  modern 
schools  of  philosophy  that  ask  us  to  follow  them 
to  the  most  bizarre  and  dismal  conclusions. 
Schopenhauer,  on  the  one  hand,  with  the  "will 
to  live"  as  the  sole  incentive  of  life,  and  Niet- 
zsche, on  the  other,  with  his  "will  to  power," 
have  each  in  his  own  way  illustrated  the  ruinous 
consequences  of  a  method  that  has,  in  every 
department  of  speculative  thought,  led  always 
and  necessarily  into  bottomless  morasses  of 
absurdity.  Such  systems  win  followers  for  a 
time,  partly  because  the  excitement  of  smashing 
things  is  always  exhilarating  to  a  certain  class  of 
minds,  more  especially  if  those  things  be  customary 
restraints  to  liberty  of  thought,  emotion,  or  action, 
and  partly  because  they  embody  an  important 
element  of  truth. 

The  misleading  method  to  which  I  allude  has 
already  occupied  our  attention.  It  is  the  method 
of  searching  for  the  realities,  the  great  moving 
principles  of  the  world,  in  the  dismembered 


156  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

elements  of  our  concrete  knowledge.  The  reali- 
ties that  we  have  learned  by  hard  experience, 
that  hold  their  place  in  our  lives  because  we  are 
obliged  to  live  them,  are  taken  to  pieces  for  the 
discovery  of  their  inmost  vital  principle.  At 
the  end  of  the  analysis  some  one  of  the  factors, 
because  it  is  persistent,  is  assumed  to  be  the  sole 
generating  power  of  all  the  varieties  and  values 
in  which  it  appears  as  an  element.  In  other 
words,  the  whole  content  of  life  is  reduced  to 
its  lowest  terms  by  an  arbitrary  cancellation, 
and  we  are  assured  that  the  surviving  factor 
represents  its  absolute  value.  Science  traces 
back  the  various  manifestations  of  energy  in  the 
universe  to  one  persistent  force.  We  are  asked, 
therefore,  by  a  certain  school  of  thought,  to  see  in 
this  the  sole  principle  of  everything  that  is,  and 
to  adjust  our  estimate  of  values  accordingly. 

The  principle  of  evolution  has  given  a  great 
impetus  and  scope  to  the  employment  of  this 
method.  For  the  gradual  becoming  of  all  things, 
from  the  simplest  beginnings,  lures  the  imagina- 
tion with  the  hope  of  finding  in  these  the  measure 
of  life.  Since  man  has  to  trace  his  genealogy 
back  to  the  lower  animals,  we  are  to  go  to  them 
for  the  valuation  of  all  that,  in  the  upward 
march  of  evolution,  has  proceeded  from  them. 
To  understand  the  vital  principle  which  underlies 
the  complexity  of  human  experience  we  are  asked 
to  eliminate  from  it  all  its  more  advanced  develop- 
ments till  we  reach  some  one  basic  principle  that 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN   SALVATION     157 

is  common  to  all  life.  Then  we  are  to  assume  that 
the  meaning  and  value  of  all  human  thought, 
emotion,  conviction,  all  its  standards,  all  its 
ideals,  all  its  hopes  and  expectations  and  motives 
of  every  kind,  must  be  expressed  in  the  terms  of 
this  one  common  principle. 

The  struggle  for  existence,  the  will  to  live, 
it  is  affirmed,  is  such  a  principle.  It  is  the  parent 
instinct  from  which  all  other  instincts  and  in- 
centives of  every  kind  have  sprung  and  of  which 
they  are  modifications.  In  the  increasing  com- 
plexity of  human  developments,  it  is  said,  these 
have  taken  on  certain  artificial  and  fanciful 
aspects  which  have  tyrannized  over  the  human 
imagination,  as  superior  and  entitled  to  authority. 
But  as  matter  of  fact,  they  are  in  no  way  superior. 
They  are,  one  and  all,  reducible  to  the  primitive 
impulse  of  life,  —  the  will  to  exist,  or,  as  Niet- 
zsche puts  it,  the  will  to  power.  Religion,  moral- 
ity, ideality  of  every  kind,  all  man's  notions  of 
the  nobility  of  his  nature,  are  simply  obscure 
phases  of  this  root  principle  of  all  life. 

That  these  interpretations  of  human  life  have 
drawn  to  themselves  many  followers,  is,  as  we 
have  said,  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  they 
embody  a  large  element  of  truth;  and,  further- 
more, that  this  truth  is  one  easily  grasped  and  of 
great  virility.  It  is  the  truth  that  meets  one  at 
every  corner,  that  forces  itself  upon  us  wherever 
busy  men  are  pursuing  the  ordinary  ends  of 
existence.  It  brings  before  us  the  forcible, 


158  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

violent  element  in  life,  before  which  its  gentler 
persuasives  seem  things  of  inconsiderable  weak- 
ness. It  is  the  echo  of  our  armaments  and 
gigantic  preparations  for  war  that  stand  out  in 
such  strong  contrast  to  the  theories  of  our  civiliza- 
tion. It  is  true  also  that  there  is  much  pretence 
and  much  self-deception  in  this  world.  Men 
take  advantage  of  legalized  morality  for  the 
furtherance  of  nefarious  schemes  and  the  satis- 
faction of  predatory  instincts.  And,  again,  it 
is  true  that  morality,  on  its  religious  side,  has  had 
its  diseased  outgrowths  that  have,  to  some  extent, 
poisoned  life  with  malarial  doctrines  and  betrayed 
it  with  false  issues. 

This  element  of  truth  has  been  sufficient  to 
blind  many  to  the  inherent  and  essential  fallacy 
of  the  scheme  of  things  which  these  philosophies 
represent.  And,  for  the  limitation  of  the  number 
of  their  adherents,  we  are  indebted  to  the  results 
reached  by  them  —  pessimism  on  the  one  hand 
and  the  apotheosis  of  brutality  on  the  other  - 
far  more  than  to  any  formal  exhibition  of  the 
fallacies  that  underlie  them. 

But,  for  the  purposes  of  this  discussion,  it  is 
desirable  and  necessary  that  we  sift  this  matter 
to  the  bottom;  for,  as  we  have  already  intimated, 
the  two  very  diverse  streams  of  development, 
ours  and  theirs,  take  their  rise  in  the  same  source; 
namely,  the  struggle  for  existence.  This  is  the 
great  motive  power  of  evolution  reduced  to  its 
lowest  terms;  it  is  the  incentive  to  effort  common 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN    SALVATION     159 

to  the  whole  animated  creation.  It  is  only  with 
the  assumption  that  it  constitutes  the  sole  motive 
of  human  activities  that  we  now  join  issue;  and 
we  do  this,  not,  primarily,  in  view  of  the  forbid- 
ding results  reached,  but  on  the  ground  that  it  is 
absolutely  unscientific,  that  it  traverses  the  facts 
and  principles  of  evolution,  and  that  every  stage 
of  the  argument  derived  from  it  is  characterized 
by  the  distortion  of  human  experience. 

Through  its  whole  course  the  process  of  evo- 
lution is  marked  by  the  introduction  of  new 
factors,  —  new  not  only  in  appearance,  but 
essentially  new  in  that  they  supply  a  hitherto 
unknown  kind  of  efficiency.  These  factors  may 
have  been  evolved  from,  or  in  connection  with, 
antecedent  forms  and  factors,  but  none  the  less 
do  they  contain  an  absolutely  new  element. 
Throughout  the  world  we  see  differences  of  degree 
passing  over  into  differences  of  essence,  though 
we  are  puzzled  to  know  at  what  point  the  trans- 
formation takes  place.  We  are  also  abundantly 
familiarized  with  the  phenomenon  of  potent 
influences  appearing  in  the  life  history  of  the  race 
that  have  no  connection,  so  far  as  we  can  see, 
with  what  has  gone  before.  They  come  in  as 
superior  officers  come  to  take  charge  of  troops  in 
the  organization  and  drilling  of  which  they  have 
had  no  part. 

This  might  be  illustrated  by  what  takes  place 
in  every  department  of  evolution.  But  there  is 
no  one  that  appeals  more  directly  to  our  common 


160  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

experience  than  the  one  that  is  specially  germane 
to  our  subject;  namely,  that  of  instinct.  I  will 
therefore  confine  myself  to  that. 

Those  who  have  devoted  themselves  to  the 
special  study  of  instinct  in  young  animals  have 
established  the  fact  that  these  make  their  appear- 
ance not  all  at  once,  but  successively,  and  at 
considerable  intervals  in  the  life  history  of  the 
individual.  One  is  predominant  at  birth  and, 
though  it  may  rule  the  situation  only  for  a  few 
days,  establishes  in  that  short  time  fixed  habits 
that  persist  through  life.  Then  there  emerges 
another  quite  different  and  often  antagonistic 
instinct  that  takes  control,  the  one  first  developed 
retiring  to  a  subordinate  position. 

For  instance,  the  congenital  instinct  of  a  newly 
born  animal  is  to  attach  itself  to  the  creature  that 
is  nearest  to  it  at  birth;  that  is,  to  its  mother.  But 
if,  in  domestication,  it  becomes  familiarized  with 
the  presence  of  man  during  these  first  days  it  ac- 
cepts him  also  as  a  friend.  But  this  friend-making 
tendency  is  soon  superseded  by  the  quite  opposite 
one  to  suspect  and  avoid  new  acquaintances. 
A  new  instinct  has  been  evolved,  the  object  of 
which  is  to  guard  its  possessor  against  the  approach 
of  enemies.  All  ranchmen  know  that  a  calf 
dropped  in  the  bush  is  practically  a  wild  creature 
unless  it  is  discovered  within  a  few  days  of  its 
birth. 

Now  what  is  true  of  the  individual  is  true 
equally  of  the  race.  Primitive  instincts,  having 


WORK    OUT   YOUR    OWN    SALVATION     161 

served  their  time,  have  a  tendency  to  retire, 
leaving  behind  them  in  the  organism  a  more  or 
less  defined  inheritance  of  habit;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  new  dominating  instincts  aspire  to 
the  place  of  control.  The  whole  process  of 
evolution  is  accompanied  by  and  hinges  upon 
such  a  succession  of  instincts.  The  ascent  to 
each  advanced  stage  is  conditioned  upon  the 
development  and,  in  the  case  of  man,  the  foster- 
ing of  some  instinct  that  has  made  its  appearance 
in  his  life  as  a  new  thing,  and  often  as  an  influ- 
ence antagonistic  to  one  that  has  been  hitherto 
predominant. 

Every  such  juncture  is  a  critical  period,  a  tide 
in  the  affairs  of  the  race  or  of  the  individual  that 
should  lead  on  to  higher  things.  That  it  does  not 
necessarily  so  result  is  manifest.  The  higher 
instinct  may  be  allowed  its  full  normal  share  in 
the  succeeding  development,  or  it  may  be  repressed 
and  overridden  by  the  stronger  instinct  that  is 
rooted  in  habit.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  life  pre- 
sents itself  in  many  cases  as  a  long-drawn-out 
conflict  between  such  instincts  and  tendencies: 
the  new  struggling  to  gain  a  foothold,  the  old 
clinging  with  tenacity  to  its  established  sway  in 
the  organism,  —  a  veritable  epitome  of  the  life 
struggle,  racial  and  individual,  in  which  we  find 
ourselves. 

It  is  upon  such  a  critical  period  that  we  enter 
when  the  race  passes  from  the  domination  of 
impulse  to  the  dawning  regime  of  reason.  The 
11 


162  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

reasoning,  inhibit! ve  tendency,  confronts  the  im- 
pulsive, strives  to  hold  it  in  check,  to  postpone  and 
restrain  its  action.  The  impulsive,  on  the  other 
hand,  ever  and  anon  rises  up  in  rebellion  and 
struggles  to  throw  off  this  upstart,  restraining 
power.  If  the  development  is  normal,  these  two 
principles  will  settle  down  to  a  joint  control, 
the  impulsive,  holding  still  an  important  place 
in  the  initiative  of  the  progressive  life;  the  reason- 
ing, exercising  the  regulative,  directing,  steadying 
function.  Superior  on  the  scale  of  being  as  the 
new  faculty  is,  it  cannot  get  on  without  its  col- 
league. Only  by  working  together,  supporting 
and  regulating  each  other,  do  they  advance  upon 
the  pathway  of  the  higher  life. 

As  to  the  instinct  that  specially  interests  us,— 
that  of  self-preservation,  or  "  the  will  to  live," 
it  is  indeed  congenital  and  universal  and,  at  first, 
finds  itself  in  absolute  control;  but  at  an  early 
stage  its  supremacy  is  disputed.  The  generative 
instinct,  even  in  the  simplest  forms  of  life,  emerges 
not  as  a  modified  form  of  the  will  to  live,  but 
as  a  principle  antagonistic  to  it.  It  does  indeed 
result  in  the  perpetuation  of  life,  but  that  result 
is  not  the  motive  that  impels  to  the  satisfaction 
of  it.  On  the  contrary,  it  always  involves  a  sacri- 
fice of  a  portion  of  that  vitality  that  has  been 
stored  up  by  the  antecedent  instinct.  When 
an  amoeba,  grown  large  with  abundant  nutrition, 
sets  off  from  itself  another  quite  independent 
organism  that  goes  its  separate  way,  it  is  not  the 


WORK   OUT   YOUR    OWN    SALVATION     163 

continued  action  of  the  will  to  live  that  is  operat- 
ing, it  is  a  totally  different  instinct,  —  one  that 
involves  self -surrender,  self-depletion.  It  gives 
half  of  itself  away  for  the  satisfaction  of  an  in- 
stinct that  it  does  not  in  the  least  understand. 

Whether  such  separation  is  attended  with 
birth-pangs,  or  not,  we  cannot  know.  But  we 
do  know  that,  as  we  ascend  the  scale  of  being 
parturition  and  maternity  are  everywhere  accom- 
panied by  suffering  and  sacrifice,  and  by  a  partial 
surrender  of  the  life  that  has  been  so  carefully 
guarded  and  valiantly  fought  for.  And  this 
element  of  surrender,  of  freely  giving  away  that 
which  has  been  hitherto  husbanded,  is  illustrated 
as  fully  in  the  vegetable  world  as  in  the  animal. 

Let  us  consider  the  history  of  a  tree.  "It  divides 
itself  into  two  epochs,  each  of  which  is  dominated 
by  a  process  seemingly  the  reverse  of  that  which 
prevailed  in  the  other.  In  the  first  period,  self- 
assertion  is  the  rule.  The  struggle  for  existence, 
at  the  expense  of  every  surrounding  thing  that 
can  be  of  use  to  "it,  is  the  apparent  end  and 
exhaustive  expression  of  its  activities.  It  robs 
the  soil,  it  contests  the  possession  of  territory 
with  other  forms  of  vegetable  life.  It  over- 
shadows and  destroys  many  weaker  relations 
on  its  way  to  prosperity.  Its  roots  burrow  far 
and  near,  contending  with  other  roots  for  every 
morsel  of  nourishment.  It  is,  in  fact,  a  greedy, 
insatiable  thing  that  gets  all  it  can,  but  never 
parts  with  any  of  its  strength.  But  when  this 


164  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

has  been  going  on  for  years  —  for  decades  per- 
haps—  a  most  wonderful,  thing  takes  place;  a 
flower  makes  its  appearance. 

"Were  our  experience  limited  to  the  growth 
of  a  single  tree,  the  advent  of  this  beautiful  and 
marvellously  adapted  organism  would  be  a  thing 
utterly  strange  and  unaccountable  in  connection 
with  the  tree  that  had  hitherto  borne  nothing 
but  leaves.  But,  more  wonderful  than  the  miracle 
of  the  flower,  is  the  miracle  of  the  process  which  it 
ushers  in,  a  process  the  reverse  of  that  which 
has  hitherto  characterized  the  tree.  That  which 
has  been  accumulated  is  now  freely  given  up, 
and  the  energies  of  the  plant  are  henceforth 
largely  diverted  into  the  production  of  that 
which  is  soon  to  be  separated  and  altogether 
estranged  from  the  producer.  The  whole  process 
of  flowering  and  seed-bearing  is  of  the  nature  of 
a  free  surrender  of  life-substance  in  such  a  way 
that  no  return  can  ever  be  received.  With 
many  plants  it  is  the  giving  up  of  all  their  life. 
They  perish  when  the  process  is  finished.  In 
every  case  it  is  exhausting,  and  growth  is  inter- 
rupted by  it."* 

Recurring  now  to  our  formula  and  recalling 
the  definition  of  salvation  as  the  progressive 
realization  of  the  highest  possibilities  of  our  being, 
it  will  be  seen  that  its  appeal  emanates  from  an 
instinct  that  overarches  and  includes  within 
itself  many  other  instincts.  Not  that  it  is  the 

*  "What  is  Reality?"  p.  477. 


WORK    OUT   YOUR    OWN   SALVATION     165 

latest  developed,  but  that  it  retains  its  position 
of  authority  always.  Other  instincts  emerge  to 
which  it  must  adjust  itself,  but  it  assimilates 
and  uses  them  in  the  prosecution  of  its  own  never- 
ending  work.  We  have  already  alluded  to  this 
overarching  instinct  as  that  of  self-realization. 

This  is,  in  its  own  right,  a  master-instinct  of 
human  evolution.  At  its  advent  man  becomes 
man.  We  cannot  say  that  it  is  absolutely  want- 
ing in  the  races  below  man,  but,  in  him,  it  assumes 
an  importance  and  sway  that  obliges  us  to  recog- 
nize in  it  the  motive  power  of  human  education, 
the  dynamic  that  drives  the  human  machinery, 
individual  and  social,  toward  some  unknown 
state  of  being,  a  fuller  realization  of  powers  and 
aptitudes,  the  nature  of  which  is,  as  yet,  only 
foreshadowed.  That  man  is,  or  may  be,  some- 
thing vastly  superior  to  what  he  now  is,  is  the 
constant  implication  of  the  pressure  that  moves 
him  and  often  drives  him  along  the  way  of  a 
larger  life.  It  makes  use  of  intelligence,  while  it 
transcends  it;  and  the  idealizing  faculty  is  its  con- 
stant and  necessary  coadjutor. 

This,  a  most  distinctively  human  attribute,  is 
at  all  times  the  light  which  determines  the  direc- 
tion of  energy.  It  points  out  to  the  imagination 
some  object,  or  goal,  to  be  striven  for,  invests 
it  with  a  dazzling  attractiveness,  makes  it  seem 
the  one  thing  to  be  desired,  and  on  it  the  passion 
for  self-realization  fastens  and  concentrates.  It 
is  not  an  infallible  guide.  In  fact  men  are  fond 


166  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  calling  it  an  ignis  fatuus.  It  is  for  ever  dis- 
appointing and,  the  disappointed  ones  often  say, 
"betraying"  those  who  follow  its  lead.  But, 
for  all  that,  it  is  the  indispensable  condition  of 
human  progress.  It  breeds  desire  in  men  and 
lures  them  to  arduous  undertakings.  Breaking 
up  contentment  with  an  assured  routine  which, 
in  the  animals  below  man,  terminates  develop- 
ment, it  generates  a  self-impelling  force  that 
drives  them  up  steep  and  rugged  ways,  seeking 
new  outlets  for  their  energy. 

Now  let  us  observe  that,  under  the  sway  of 
the  ideal,  the  instinct  of  self-realization  becomes 
itself  transformed.  At  first,  and  through  much 
of  its  career,  it  works  in  harmony  with  the  prin- 
ciple of  self-preservation,  or  the  will  to  live,  but 
at  innumerable  points,  as  the  process  advances, 
it  runs  counter  to  it  and  restrains  it.  Self-preser- 
vation has  regard  to  the  continuance  of  the  present 
state.  It  is  conservative,  takes  no  unnecessary 
risks,  conforms  to  that  which  has  been  and  is. 
Self-realization  is  impatient  of  that  which  is. 
Cognizant  of  the  ideal  future,  it  gladly  takes 
risks  in  the  hope  of  realizing  it.  "He  that 
saveth  his  life  shall  lose  it"  is  its  answer  to  the 
prudent  counsels  of  the  older  instinct. 

Schopenhauer's  "will  to  live"  becomes,  in  his 
hands,  a  principle  of  insatiable  progressiveness 
only  because  he  transcends  his  formula,  identifying 
it  with  the  will  to  an  ever-increasing,  extending, 
superabundant  life.  And  when  Nietzsche  en- 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN    SALVATION     167 

larges  the  outlook  by  his  phrase,  "the  will  to 
power ,"  it  is  that  he  feels  the  insufficiency  of  the 
preceding  formula.  It  is  an  admission  of  inade- 
quacy, but  a  very  meagre  one.  The  instinct 
that  urges  to  self-realization  does,  sometimes, 
take  the  form  of  a  will  to  power.  But  this  is 
only  one  of  an  innumerable  number  of  quests 
that  draw  men  out  of  themselves  and  make  them 
impatient  of  mere  existence.  And  what  is  more, 
it  is  far  from  being  the  noblest,  or  most  satisfying. 
A  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  life  to 
which  self-realization,  combined  with  the  idealiz- 
ing faculty,  introduces  men  is  its  manifoldness,  — 
the  divergence  of  the  ways  by  which  it  leads  them 
to  transcend  themselves.  The  tribes  below  man 
are  most  restricted  as  to  the  means  of  gratifying 
their  instincts.  They  are  narrowly  hemmed  in 
by  circumstance.  The  way  in  which  they  must 
walk  is  clearly  indicated  at  every  step.  Primitive 
man  is  in  much  the  same  predicament.  But, 
when  intelligence  has  enlarged  the  field  of  possi- 
bilities, multiplied  the  avenues  and  the  modes 
of  realization,  the  element  of  discriminating 
selection  supervenes  to  complicate  and  dignify 
the  situation.  It  is  at  this  point  that  man  be- 
comes, in  a  measure,  a  law  unto  himself.  The 
world  is,  so  to  speak,  before  him,  he  is  the  arbiter 
of  his  own  fortunes.  The  kinds  of  man  that  he 
may  be,  the  kinds  that  he  is  solicited  and  perhaps 
importuned  to  be,  depend  largely  on  his  tempera- 
ment, his  natural  endowments,  and  his  social 


168  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

setting.  But  there  are  few  who  are  not  drawn 
in  more  than  one  direction. 

The  value  and  boundlessness  of  this  race 
inheritance  dawns  very  gradually  upon  human 
consciousness.  One  of  the  emotions  engendered, 
as  man  emerges  from  the  enthralment  of  the 
mere  struggle  for  existence,  is  that  of  exultation 
in  newly  discovered  powers;  and  hero-worship  is 
the  result.  Every  exceptionally  great  man  is 
an  embodiment  of  the  perfections  possible  to 
human  nature,  and  the  heart  of  the  worshipper 
swells  with  pride  at  the  thought  of  his  relation  to 
it.  Legends  of  great  deeds,  epic  poems,  myth- 
ologic  demi-gods,  are  expressions  of  it.  And  this 
primitive  mood  is  also  a  persistent  one,  de- 
pressed at  times  into  a  minor  key,  but  anon 
swelling  again  into  enthusiasm.  At  first  its 
theme  is  man's  superiority  over  the  beasts  who 
are  physically  stronger  than  he,  then  it  is  the 
triumph  of  man  over  man  and  imaginary  monsters, 
and  in  these  later  days  it  is  man's  subjugation  of 
the  forces  of  nature.  Now,  as  at  the  beginning, 
men  are  prone  to  burst  into  a  delirium  of  rejoicing 
when  a  representative  of  the  human  race  scores 
new  victories  in  any  direction. 

But,  with  all  its  vitality,  this  mood  of  self- 
glorification  expresses  but  a  small  part  of  the 
change  that  has  been  wrought  by  man's  advance 
in  the  scale  of  intelligence.  It  is  but  the  occa- 
sional effervescence  from  elements  that  are  work- 
ing out  serious  transformations  in  the  depths  of 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN    SALVATION     169 

his  nature.  Hardly  has  he  reached  the  con- 
sciousness of  himself  as  a  superior  being  than  he 
discerns  in  that  future  of  allurements  also  a  land 
of  shadows,  a  land  of  forbidding  possibilities 
where  weird  shapes  pass  and  repass.  Fear,  as 
well  as  hope  and  exultation  have  come  to  stay 
with  him.  He  carries  a  weight  on  this  higher 
plane  of  existence  that  he  never  knew  before. 
His  eyes  have  been  opened  to  the  knowledge  of 
good  and  evil.  He  has  become  a  responsible 
being.  His  conception  of  character,  of  personal 
worth,  has  begun  to  develop;  and  the  discernment 
of  essentially  higher  and  lower  possibilities,  that 
are  in  a  measure  within  his  control,  steady  and 
sober  his  outlook  upon  life. 

We  cannot  wonder  that,  under  the  stress  and 
anxiety  of  this  higher  consciousness,  men  should 
have  been  led  to  contrast  unfavorably  the  higher 
estate  with  the  simpler  one  of  narrower  issues, 
that  they  should  have  regarded  the  passage  from 
innocence  to  insight  as  a  fall,  that  they  should 
have  looked  back  with  regret  and  envy  upon  the 
lot  of  those  whose  lives  were  marked  out  for  them, 
who  were  firmly  led,  without  knowledge  or  fore- 
thought, anxiety  or  misgivings  of  theirs,  into  the 
ways  that  were  best  for  them.  The  existence 
of  a  great  historic  Church  that  has,  through  the 
Christian  ages,  assumed  the  responsibility  of 
giving  such  a  guidance  to  a  world  weary  of  its 
liberty  is  the  standing  witness  to  the  exacting 
and  trying  nature  of  the  higher  career,  upon  which 


170  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

human  intelligence  and  the  power  of  moral  dis- 
crimination has  launched  the  race. 

Looked  at  from  one  point  of  view,  the  out- 
come of  human  evolution  is  seen  to  be  very  evil. 
From  the  time  of  his  majority  on,  man  has  shown 
a  most  fruitful  and  perennial  aptitude  for  mis- 
managing his  affairs.  His  career,  from  the  dawn 
of  intelligence  and  moral  responsibility  to  his 
present  status,  has  been  marked  by  blunders  and 
insanities  of  the  most  far-reaching  and  tragic 
character.  The  development  of  his  moral  nature 
has  produced  an  appalling  amount  of  wickedness, 
in  which  the  creatures  below  him  in  the  scale  of 
being  have  no  participation.  They  are  unmoral, 
he  is  immoral.  They  may  be  fierce,  predatory, 
regardless  of  the  suffering  they  inflict  on  others, 
but  they  are  not,  like  man,  knowingly  and  exult- 
ingly  cruel,  vicious,  devilish;  they  are  not,  like 
him,  the  victims  of  unbalanced  natures  and 
conscious  degradation. 

To  rectify  that  which  is  unbalanced,  to  curb 
the  passions  that  lead  to  the  inordinate  develop- 
ment of  quests  that  are  properly  means  to  higher 
ends,  is  the  task  which  occupies  man  increasingly. 
His  salvation  is  never  worked  out,  but  with  every 
individual,  every  form  of  society,  in  every  age, 
the  conflict  between  the  normal  and  the  abnormal, 
moral  sanity  and  moral  insanity,  growth  and 
degeneration,  the  triumph,  or  defeat,  of  the  life 
forces  that  make  for  a  nobler  type  of  being,  is 
renewed.  And  the  more  complex  life  becomes, 


WORK   OUT   YOUR   OWN   SALVATION     171 

the  more  the  power  and  control  of  man  increases, 
the  hotter  is  the  battle  between  the  opposing 
forces  of  good  and  evil.  In  the  midst  of  our 
infinitely  varied  life  of  to-day,  with  its  thronging 
incentives  and  seductions,  the  call  to  work  out 
one's  own  salvation  is  more  imperative,  more 
stirring,  more  clearly  fraught,  on  the  one  hand, 
with  the  note  of  hope  and  of  enthusiasm,  and  on 
the  other  with  that  of  despair,  than  in  any  age 
that  has  preceded  it.  There  is  a  breadth  and  a 
scope  to  its  meaning  that  it  has  never  had  in  the 
ages  of  narrower  horizons. 

But  what  of  the  night?  How  goes  the  com- 
bat? Is  the  human  race  losing,  or  gaining?  Are 
individuals  battling  successfully  in  the  turmoil  of 
material  interests,  that  now  surge  against  each 
other  and  anon  combine  in  a  sweeping  current 
that  is  all  but  irresistible?  And  this  great  com- 
plexity which  we  sometimes  call  the  social  organ- 
ism, or,  in  vaguer  phrase,  human  civilization, 
what  shall  we  say  of  this?  Is  it  a  success?  Is  it 
moving  on  to  higher  and  better  things?  Or  is  it 
an  advanced  stage  of  degeneration,  the  forerunner 
of  anarchy  and  dissolution?  From  the  standpoint 
of  current  thought  this  would  seem  to  be  the  most 
momentous  question  of  our  day,  the  riddle  in  which 
every  one,  from  the  most  buoyant  optimist  to  the 
Cassandras  of  pessimism,  are  interested. 

But  it  is  worse  than  useless  to  attempt  an 
answer  to  it  until  we  have  determined  a  point 
that,  in  the  logical  order,  necessarily  comes 


172  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

before  it.  What  constitutes  success  in  the  evo- 
lution of  progressive  being?  Toward  what  kind 
of  a  realization  on  the  ascending  scale  are  we,  as 
a  race,  or  as  individuals,  moving?  If  we  make  a 
mistake  in  our  answer  to  this  question  we  may  be 
looking  fixedly  for  the  truth  in  the  wrong  direc- 
tion, gazing  into  the  west  to  see  the  sun  rise. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE    FUTURE    OF    EVOLUTION 

WHAT  constitutes  success  in  the  evolu- 
tion of  progressive  being?  This  ques- 
tion, if  considered  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  individual,  would  produce  a  great  variety 
of  answers,  none  of  which  would  have  anything 
other  than  a  personal  value.  What  we  require 
is  an  answer  which,  though  speculatively  reached, 
is  the  outgrowth  of  a  careful  study  of  the  facts  of 
the  one  great  process  of  evolution  of  which  we 
have  any  knowledge.  Our  investigation  is  not 
for  the  purpose  of  amusement.  It  is  one  of  serious 
import.  We  are  making  an  effort  to  attain  to  a 
fuller  knowledge  of  God  and  of  man,  and  of  their 
mutual  relations,  by  ascertaining  the  end  toward 
which  both  are  moving. 


The  data  for  such  a  forecast  must  be  sought 
both  in  the  relatively  near  and  in  the  remote  past; 
that  is,  in  the  history  of  evolution  that  antedates 
the  appearance  of  man,  and  also  in  the  history  of 
human  evolution.  We  must  look  into  the  former 
for  analogies  to  guide  us  in  the  formation  of 

173 


174  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

hypotheses,  then  we  must  scrutinize  the  latter  to 
see  how  these  hypotheses  fare  when  tested  by  the 
facts  of  human  experience.  The  first  glance  at 
the  situation  is  discouraging.  For,  so  far  as  we 
can  see,  many  of  the  distinct  advances  in  the 
process  have  been  sprung  upon  the  world  as 
surprises.  When  a  new  type  has  emerged  it 
seems  to  have  appeared  on  the  scene  suddenly; 
proceeding,  probably,  from  an  antecedent  form, 
but,  as  related  to  it,  a  monstrosity,  a  strange  crea- 
ture with  an  enlarged  organization  and  hitherto 
unknown  aptitudes  and  functions. 

The  whole  course  of  evolution  is  marked  by 
such  new  departures,  each  one  of  which  has  run 
its  own  specialized  career  and  settled  down  into  a 
permanent  type,  which  apparently  leads  to  nothing 
beyond  itself.  What  we  see  around  us  is  a  multi- 
plicity of  such  arrested  developments,  each  one  of 
which  seems  to  signalize  a  dead-stop  in  the  process. 
Like  the  branch  line  of  a  railway,  it  has  its  ter- 
minus, and  beyond  this  there  is  no  thoroughfare. 
There  may  still  be  indefinite  variation,  but  the 
type  is  persistent;  that  is,  the  tendency  to  revert 
to  it  is  far  stronger  than  the  departures  from 
it  and  prevails  over  them.  Nothing  essentially 
higher  than  a  horse  can  be  bred  from  a  horse  by 
successive  modifications,  nothing  essentially  higher 
or  different  from  a  man  can,  by  ordinary  genera- 
tion, be  bred  from  a  man. 

But  now,  taking  a  wider  view  of  the  situation, 
we  are  rewarded  with  a  principle  of  continuity 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION     175 

which  is  distinctly  helpful.  While  arrested  devel- 
opment, indeterminate  issues,  and  degeneration, 
abundantly  characterize  the  great  process  in  its 
details,  there  is  discoverable,  from  a  higher  point 
of  view,  a  well-marked  through-line  of  evolution. 
Every  higher  stage  of  being  is  higher  in  virtue  of 
an  increased  complexity  of  organization,  and  it 
is  always  from  the  more  complex  that  the  next 
higher  springs.  I  am  speaking,  be  it  understood, 
of  the  great  movements,  the  epoch-making  ad- 
vances of  evolution,  —  advances  like  that  from  / 
the  inorganic  to  the  organic,  from  inanimate  to 
animate  forms,  from  the  non-sentient  to  the 
sentient,  from  homogeneous  aggregations  of  living 
beings  to  complex  organizations  in  which  many 
different  orders  of  beings  with  different  functions 
unite  to  make  one  highly  complex  being  with  one 
central  consciousness.  So  also  the  advance  from 
sedile  forms  to  those  capable  of  moving  from 
place  to  place,  and  that  which  distinguishes  the 
simplest  mode  of  propagation,  by  budding  or 
segmentation,  from  that  of  sexual  generation. 

These  epoch-making  advances  mark  the  main 
course,  the  through-line  of  evolution.  When  a 
great  step  forward  has  been  made  we  are  justified 
hi  the  assumption  that  progress  is  to  be  looked 
for  in  this  line.  There  was  a  time  when  gill- 
breathing  animals  were  the  highest  type  on  earth. 
But  when  lung-breathing  animals  appeared,  the 
future  of  evolution  was  theirs.  The  structural 
changes  that  have  marked  these  upward  move- 


176  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

ments  have  been  many  and  various,  affecting  all 
parts  of  the  body.  But  there  is  one  factor  that 
shows  a  constant  increase;  that  is,  the  nervous 
system.  The  enlargement  and  complexity  of 
this  characterizes  every  advanced  step.  The 
importance  of  the  upward  movement  when  man 
appeared  on  the  scene  can  hardly  be  exaggerated, 
though  its  significance  was  not  in  evidence  at  the 
time  of  its  development.  It  was,  indeed,  provided 
for  in  his  structural  formation,  but  as  this  was 
far  in  advance  of  the  immediate  necessities  of  a 
being  only  slightly  removed  in  his  habits  from  the 
creatures  just  below  him,  it  afforded  only  a  faint 
hint  of  its  future. 

Could  there  have  been  a  comparative  anatomist 
there  to  study  this  new  type  he  could  have  dis- 
covered nothing  to  make  him  suspect  that  a 
radically  new  chapter  in  the  history  of  evolution 
had  been  entered  upon.  True,  the  greatly  en- 
larged brain-cavity  would  have  been  to  him  the 
prophecy  of  a  being  superior  to  any  that  had 
hitherto  existed.  But  this  advance  was  in  the 
regular  line.  Here  was  apparent  provision  for  a 
great  increase  in  the  volume  and  complexity  of 
the  nervous  system.  But  all  the  difference  indi- 
cated could  be  summed  up  in  terms  of  more  or 
less,  and  the  whole  course  of  evolution  had  been 
characterized  by  the  continual  increase  of  this 
particular  element.  He  could  not,  in  the  most 
courageous  flights  of  fancy,  have  approximated 
to  the  reality  of  the  possibilities  that  lay  dormant 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION     177 

in  that  enlarged  cerebrum;  for  the  order  of  crea- 
tion, as  it  had  been  hitherto,  would  have  held 
his  imagination  in  leash. 

We  are  measurably  in  a  similar  position.  We 
are,  more  or  less,  hampered  as  to  the  largeness  of 
our  expectations  by  the  past  of  human  develop- 
ment which  we  know  and  can  study,  and  our  fore- 
cast of  the  future  is  limited,  more  or  less,  by  the 
belief  that  what  has  been  will  be,  with  modifica- 
tions. But,  there  is  a  vast  difference  between 
knowing  nothing  of  what  human  evolution  is  and 
is  to  be,  and  knowing  as  much  as  we  do,  —  a  differ- 
ence as  great  as  that  between  absolute  darkness 
and  twilight.  It  is  not  simply  that  our  knowledge 
of  the  situation  is  increased,  that  we  are  able  to 
look  back  over  vast  realms  of  experience  and 
achievement  that  have  been  gradually  realized 
through  the  effort  and  cumulative  growth  of 
generations;  it  is  not  alone  that  we  are  apprised 
of  the  fact  that  all  the  advances  of  evolution 
antecedent  to  man  are  as  nothing  in  comparison 
with  that  which  his  advent  signalized.  In  addition 
to  all  this  knowledge,  and  of  far  more  importance 
than  it,  is  the  training  we  have  received  in  the 
course  of  its  acquisition.  We  have  learned  not 
only  how  to  accumulate  knowledge,  but  how  to 
use  it,  how  to  bring  its  parts  into  relation  to  each 
other  and  to  organize  it  for  additional  conquests. 

And  furthermore,  our  imaginations  have  been 
trained  and  disciplined  till  they  have  become 
reliable  instruments  for  the  construction  of  a 

12 


178  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

hypothetical  future.  Nor  is  the  use  of  this 
instructed  faculty  a  matter  wholly  contingent  on 
the  will  to  use  it.  We  needs  must  construct  a 
future  for  ourselves,  whether  we  will  or  no.  The 
irrepressible  speculative  instinct  streams  forth  of 
itself  in  imaginative  ventures.  It  is  futile  to  try 
to  repress  it.  It  is  our  highest  privilege  to  curb, 
direct,  and  use  it. 

To  return  to  the  question  in  hand.  The  knowl- 
edge that  the  appearance  of  man  signalized  a 
radically  new  departure  in  the  great  process, 
justifies  us  in  the  assumption  that  the  next  higher 
type  will  be  in  the  line  of  human  evolution. 

A  very  pertinent  question  suggests  itself  at  this 
initial  stage  of  the  inquiry,  in  view  of  the  enormous 
differences  which  distinguish  contemporary  from 
primitive  man.  Do  we  find  any  evidence  to 
warrant  the  belief  that  we  have  already  entered 
upon  the  higher  stage  that  we  are  seeking?  That 
is,  are  there  indications  that  a  new,  distinct  species 
has  already  become  a  living  reality  alongside  of 
and  closely  related  to  the  older  type  from  which 
it  sprung?  We  can  answer  at  once  that  there  are 
many  developments  which  seem  to  point  in  this 
direction.  But  their  value,  as  related  to  other 
evidence,  will  appear  at  the  end  of  the  discussion 
rather  than  in  the  middle  of  it.  In  the  meantime 
we  may  carry  it  with  us  as  an  hypothesis  that  may 
be  strengthened,  or  the  reverse,  by  our  investiga- 
tion. We  have  remarked,  in  passing,  that  nothing 
radically  different  from  a  man  can  be  expected  to 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION  179 

spring  from  the  genus  homo  by  ordinary  generation. 
That  is,  man's  physical  structure  seems  to  be  as 
fixed  as  that  of  any  of  the  annuals  that  surround 
hun. 

But  there  is  this  great  difference.  There  exists 
in  man  one  department  of  his  organization  that 
is  indeterminate.  This  department,  the  nervous 
system,  has  been  the  instrumentality  through 
which  all  the  advance,  from  the  most  primitive 
to  the  most  highly  evolved  man,  has  been  achieved. 
But  all  this  difference  has,  from  one  point  of  view, 
been  realized  without  giving  rise  to  a  new  type. 
The  cumulative  result  has  not  been  accomplished 
through  the  agency  of  ordinary  generation;  it  has 
not  passed  by  physical  heredity  from  father  to 
son.  And,  if  we  must  limit  ourselves  to  the  defini- 
tion of  a  new  type  which  this  point  of  view  involves, 
we  not  only  have  not  entered  upon  its  realization, 
but  we  can  find  no  encouragement  for  anticipating 
that  we  ever  shall  enter  upon  it.  For  this  defini- 
tion, following  analogy,  shuts  us  up  to  the  hypoth- 
esis that  somehow  and  somewhere  there  will 
emerge  from  the  human  race  a  preternatural 
individual,  superior,  physically  and  mentally,  to 
man,  and  that  from  him  a  prepotent  type  will  be 
established,  producing  a  race  of  beings  of  like 
superiority. 

But  all  our  knowledge  of  the  history  of  evolution, 
both  antecedent  and  subsequent  to  the  appear- 
ance of  man,  discourages  any  such  expectation. 
Superior  individuals  have,  it  is  true,  made  their 


180  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

appearance,  all  along  the  line  of  our  social  evolu- 
tion, who  were  as  much  above  the  average  of 
humanity  as  the  hypothesis  demands.  There 
have  been  many  such  who,  if  they  could  have 
reproduced  their  kind  by  natural  generation, 
would  have  given  us  a  race  of  beings  as  much 
superior  to  man  as  he  is  superior  to  some  of  the 
orders  next  below  him.  But  this  has  never  been 
the  case.  These  qualities  are  not  transmitted  in 
any  such  degree  as  to  build  up  a  new  type.  There 
is  sometimes  a  modified  inheritance  through  a 
generation  or  two.  But  the  law  that  seems  to 
dominate  the  situation  is  that  of  reversion  to 
type.  There  is  no  permanent  accumulation  of 
qualities  registered  in  human  organization. 

Each  individual  of  the  race  begins  life's  career 
with  a  practically  similar  outfit  of  instrumental- 
ities, powers,  and  adaptations.  What  he  becomes, 
depends  upon  the  quality  of  the  organism  he  has 
inherited,  plus  his  own  choices  and  efforts.  He 
may  rise  far  above  his  progenitors  both  in  acquisi- 
tion and  in  character,  he  may  build  up  a  physical 
organization  of  brain-cells  that  separates  him  by 
a  wide  interval  from  the  great  multitude  of  his 
fellow-creatures.  By  himself  he  belongs  to  a 
superior  race;  but  it  goes  no  further. 

Over  against  this  genealogical  impass  we  have 
to  set  the  fact  that,  with  man,  another  kind  of 
heredity  has  come  into  the  world.  Each  great 
mind  has  left  behind  it  a  spiritual  inheritance,  a 
veritable  progeny  of  minds  that  has  conserved  and 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION  181 

transmitted  the  new  factors  introduced.  Each 
new  tendency  is  represented  by  a  specialized  class 
of  minds  that  retains  its  peculiarities  from  genera- 
tion to  generation.  Not  far  back  in  our  history 
some  of  these  classes  were  called  guilds,  and  these 
guilds  kept  as  closely  to  themselves  as  any  well- 
defined  species.  New  blood  was  at  times  intro- 
duced, but  for  the  most  part  they  were  close 
corporations.  But  where  these  visible  demarca- 
tions were  lacking,  the  separateness  was  main- 
tained by  natural  aptitudes  and  disabilities. 
Birds  of  a  feather  flocked  together,  assimilated, 
fostered,  and  perhaps  improved  upon,  their  special 
inheritance. 

Now  if  the  matter  ended  here  we  should  have 
made  no  progress  toward  the  discovery  of  a  new 
persistent  human  type.  These  specializations 
are,  generally  speaking,  indeterminate  variations 
that  are  continually  commingling  and  passing 
over  into  each  other,  —  functional  differences 
that  leave  the  human  agent  simply  human.  The 
permanent  element  is  really  that  which  has  become 
the  property  of  the  race. 

II 

The  race.  —  Here  again  we  touch  a  unity,  — 
that  is,  the  conception  of  a  unity,  —  and  the  idea 
grows  apace  and  takes  shape.  All  the  differentia- 
tion that  we  have  been  considering  is  seen  to  con- 
verge and  find  a  structural  justification  as  parts 
of  that  race  unity.  Each  department  is  seen  to 


182  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

be  an  efficient  and  more  or  less  necessary  factor 
in  that  which  we  call  the  social  organism.  This 
wonderful  complex  of  human  constructions  has 
come  into  being  as  their  product.  And,  at  this 
point,  biology  comes  to  our  aid  with  an  analogy 
that  is  one  of  the  most  luminous  of  modern  dis- 
coveries. It  is  the  a.  b.  c.  of  evolution  and  the 
reader  will  pardon  its  recapitulation. 

At  the  beginning  of  animated  existence  the 
unit,  the  individual,  is  the  single  cell,  living  its 
isolated,  independent  life  and  multiplying  only 
by  dividing  itself  into  two  identically  similar  cells 
which  continue  to  be  as  absolutely  independent 
of  each  other  as  the  original  cell.  Then  appears 
a  marvellous  change.  There  comes  a  time  when 
the  new  cell,  instead  of  separating  from  the  original 
one,  remains  connected  with  it.  Many  subsequent 
cells  do  the  same,  and  instead  of  isolated  individ- 
uals-we  have  a  community  with  a  certain  solidarity 
of  interest  and  mutual  support.  Then  another 
change.  This  community  gives  rise  to  cells  of  a 
quite  different  order,  which  also  remain  attached 
to  it  and  perform  important  functions  for  the 
benefit  of  the  whole  community.  This  gives  us 
a  rudimentary  organism,  and  the  same  process, 
repeated  over  and  over  again  by  the  production 
of  new  classes  of  cells  with  new  functions,  each  of 
which  takes  its  place  in  the  life  of  the  expanding 
organism  helpfully  and  without  disturbance, 
gives  us  the  succession  of  associated  beings  that 
culminates  in  man. 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION  183 

This  process  is  recapitulated  every  time  a  new 
individual  is  born  into  the  world,  and  in  the 
history  of  the  formation  of  civilized  society  we 
seem  to  have  a  repetition  of  it  on  a  more  extended 
scale.  This  latter  is  the  cumulative  outcome  of  a 
succession  of  new  types  of  men,  each  with  hitherto 
unknown  abilities,  insights,  and  aspirations.  Each 
new  type  has  added  something  to  the  collective 
life  of  the  race  of  the  nation,  which  is  thus  grad- 
ually organized  into  a  solidarity  in  which  every 
part  is  more  or  less  dependent  upon  the  normal 
activity  of  all  the  other  parts. 

The  exceeding  fitness  of  this  analogy  has  drawn 
from  different  departments  of  thought  the  most 
extreme  affirmations  of  its  soundness  as  the  expo- 
nent of  reality.  One  tells  us  that  the  nation  is 
not  only  an  organism,  it  is  a  personality,  and  a 
moral  personality,*  while  another  declares  that  the 
individual,  as  related  to  the  social  organism,  is 
naught  but  a  fragment  of  social  tissue. 

Even  though  we  should  think  it  desirable  to 
state  the  case  less  absolutely,  these  affirmations 
embody  an  element  of  unquestionable  truth. 
The  social  organism  is  an  actuality,  it  is  a  real 
entity,  a  great  living,  expanding,  energizing,  pro- 
gressive reality.  It  is,  from  one  point  of  view, 
the  product  of  human  activity,  but  it  is  equally 
true  that  the  great  achievements  of  the  race  are 
its  outcome  and  are  dependent  upon  it.  In  it 
we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being,  and  it  is 

*  "The  Nation,"  by  Elijah  Mulford, 


184  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

clearly  advancing  to  still  greater  complexities  of 
organization. 

So  impressive  is  this  view  of  the  situation,  so 
fraught  with  the  anticipation  of  great  future 
developments,  that  many,  in  our  day,  would  have 
us  rest  the  case  here.  What  need  is  there  to  look 
further  when  an  unfinished  work  of  such  magni- 
tude is  committed  to  us?  Is  it  not  folly  to  try  to 
look  beyond  it  when  we  can  as  yet  hardly  begin 
to  see  what  is  contained  in  it?  Can  we  afford  to 
deplete  our  energies  and  our  enthusiasm  in  the 
contemplation  of  that  which  is  far  off,  uncertain, 
and  vague,  when  more  than  we  can  command  of 
these  is  required  for  the  prosecution  of  the  work 
in  the  midst  of  which  we  find  ourselves,  battling, 
as  it  were,  for  very  life? 

The  answer  to  this  view  seems  to  me  capable 
of  statement  in  very  few  words,  and  so,  because  it 
is  simply  a  marked  illustration  of  that  infirmity 
or  rather  immaturity  of  judgment  that  has  been 
in  all  stages  of  human  evolution  one  of  the  greatest 
obstacles  to  progress;  namely,  short-sightedness. 
All  along  the  course  we  can  see  that  this  has 
worked,  both  in  individuals  and  in  society,  for  the 
production  of  arrested  development.  The  vice  of 
modern  society  has  been  said  to  be,  living  too  ex- 
clusively in  and  for  the  present,  or  the  immediate, 
that  which  seems  just  a  little  way  beyond  us. 
And  in  all  ages  the  mistake  of  mistakes  has  been 
that  of  substituting  means  for  ends,  —  seeing  in 
the  instrumentalities  of  life  the  ultimate  goal  for 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION  185 

which  it  is  worth  while  to  give  up  our  whole  lives. 
We  can  see,  as  we  survey  the  lower  planes  of 
human  effort  and  ambition,  how  this  mistake, 
embodying  often  a  large  element  of  wilfulness, 
has  led  to  the  wreck  of  individual  lives  full 
of  high  possibilities,  how  it  has  extinguished  in 
disillusion  and  despair  the  light  that  might  have 
shone  with  an  ever-increasing  brightness,  how  it 
has  submerged  in  deepest  gloom  souls  that  were 
constituted  for  progressive  happiness. 

The  social  organism,  stupendous  reality  that  it 
is,  cannot  be  the  goal  of  evolution,  the  final  end 
toward  which  the  process  moves.  It  cannot  be, 
first,  because  we  can  see  through  it  and  beyond  it; 
second,  because  there  is  nothing  in  it,  or  in  its 
tendencies,  to  suggest  a  fruition  worthy  of  the 
great  process,  and  third,  because  its  adjustments 
and  its  working,  from  first  to  last,  seem  to  imply 
an  order  to  which  perfection  is  impossible.  When 
we  try  to  forecast  a  future  in  which  the  social 
organism  is  to  figure  as  the  culmination  of  the 
process  that  has  brought  forth  man,  we  are  not 
only  hopelessly  bewildered  in  a  maze  of  conflicting 
issues,  but,  when  we  have  tasked  our  imaginations 
to  the  utmost,  their  best  presentations  seem  but  a 
mockery  of  the  ideals  that  have  loomed  large  in 
the  vision  of  prophets  and  poets,  —  a  satire  on 
the  laborious,  long-drawn-out  warfare  that  has 
led  up  to  them.  The  light  fades  out  of  our  Utopias 
even  while  we  gaze  at  them,  and  they  are  seen  to 
be  cold,  passionless  things. 


186  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

What  then  shall  we  make  of  this  great  reality? 
If  the  social  order  is  not  the  final  goal  of  evolution, 
what  explanation  of  it  can  we  find?  Is  there  any 
conceivable  end,  sufficiently  important  and  valu- 
able, to  figure  as  the  justification  of  this  great 
stream  -of  elaborately  organized  energy? 

There  is,  it  seems  to  me,  one,  and  only  one, 
that  meets  the  requirement;  and  one  word  ex- 
presses it  —  education.  Etymologically  this  word 
is  closely  allied  to  evolution,  but  it  carries  a  much 
higher  significance  in  that  it  calls  attention  to 
the  advanced  reaches  of  the  great  process,  while 
the  word  evolution  has  always  been  associated  with 
its  earlier  stages.  Evolution  has,  from  the  be- 
ginning, been  a  word  of  offence  to  those  whose 
interest  in  the  world's  becoming  has  centred  in  its 
latest  products,  for  it  seems  to  implicate  the  whole 
of  reality  in  the  category  of  blind  forces.  The 
word  education,  on  the  other  hand,  affirms  and 
emphasizes  intelligence  and  the  development  of 
character  through  discipline.  The  former  sug- 
gests the  unconscious,  mechanical  aspect  of  nature, 
the  latter  a  more  or  less  conscious  process  under 
the  guidance  of  a  higher  intelligence. 

I  am  speaking,  be  it  understood,  of  education  in 
the  most  comprehensive  sense;  that  is,  the  sense  in 
which  the  whole  development  of  the  human  race, 
individual,  social,  political,  and  religious,  may  be 
construed  as  an  education.  The  conditions  of 
that  education,  its  environment,  the  problems  to 
be  worked  out,  the  means  and  instrumentalities 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION  187 

to  be  employed,  the  agents  to  be  educated,  have 
been  supplied  and  brought  into  relation  to  each 
other  by  the  supreme  intelligence  that  works  in 
all  nature.  In  the  earlier  stages  the  individual 
knows  nothing  of  what  his  existence  means  nor 
whither  it  tends.  Nevertheless  an  important 
work  is  going  on  within  him.  The  conditions  in 
which  he  finds  himself  necessitate  effort  and  war- 
fare for  the  salvation  of  the  body,  and  this  body  is 
of  such  a  nature  that  effort  and  conflict  increase 
its  wants  and,  at  the  same  time,  its  power  of  ac- 
quisition. 

At  every  step  of  the  way,  the  organism,  both 
social  and  individual,  encounters  new  problems 
to  be  solved,  new  difficulties  to  be  overcome. 
In  every  relation  of  life  it  is  sorely  tested  and 
stimulated.  It  is  often  a  severe  discipline.  The 
fact  that  it  is  an  upward  career  is  made  painfully 
apparent.  The  human  spirit  often  faints  before 
what  is  required  of  it.  It  cannot  cast  itself  loose 
from  the  lower  creature  from  which  it  has  sprung. 
It  is  dependent  upon  it;  and  its  demands,  often 
imperious,  have  to  be  listened  to  and  provided 
for  and  at  the  same  time  regulated,  controlled, 
governed,  in  a  word,  educated. 

The  history  of  this  upward  career  of  the  human 
race  presents  many  points  of  view.  It  is  a  war- 
fare, it  is  a  conquest,  it  is  a  triumph;  it  is  also  a 
defeat,  a  long-drawn-out  story  of  loss,  degenera- 
tion, tragedy.  The  law  of  increase  for  those  who 
face  the  situation  and  fight  the  good  fight  is  offset 


188  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

by  the  law  of  loss.  Powers  and  opportunities 
are  forfeited  by  those  who  refuse.  The  upward 
way  means  hardship,  labour,  patience,  endurance, 
suffering.  It  means  also  joy,  exhilaration,  peace 
with  oneself,  in  a  word,  abiding  happiness.  The 
two  are  mingled.  The  disciplinary  part  is  not, 
in  most  lives,  an  uninterrupted  strain  that  breaks 
the  spirit.  The  reward  of  activity  and  earnest 
striving  is  closely  associated  with  it.  The  com- 
pensations of  life  are  not  postponed  to  some  far-off 
event  of  the  future,  they  are,  in  the  great  majority 
of  experiences,  immediate.  Life  is  a  thing  worth 
cherishing  for  its  own  sake,  even  though  it  fall 
short  of  the  fullest  salvation,  —  the  realization  of 
the  highest  things  possible. 

To  study  and  understand  this  method,  so 
amply  illustrated  in  human  history,  is  to  study 
and  to  understand  the  great  intelligence  that 
has  instituted  it.  He  has  declared  Himself  in  it 
more  fully  than  in  any  other  department  of  His 
creation;  and,  in  our  own  painfully  developing 
science  of  education,  we  have  the  sole  key  to  its 
interpretation. 

!  Let  us  then  make  the  hypothesis  that  the  social 
organism  is  the  embodiment  of  an  educational 
process, — a  great  training  school,  broadly  planned 
and  firmly  administered  by  a  higher  intelligence; 
a  school  of  discipline  calculated  to  stimulate  and 
draw  out  innate  powers,  to  forge  character  through 
grappling  with  and  overcoming  difficulties;  a 
curriculum  jfor  elevating,  expanding,  purging, 


THE  FUTURE  OF  EVOLUTION     180 

purifying  humanity,  —  not,  perhaps,  the  whole 
human  race,  but  the  survivors  of  it,  those  who, 
with  the  help  of  a  power-not-themselves,  work 
out  their  own  salvation.  Not  that  this  concept 
will  at  once  solve  all  our  difficulties.  The  terms 
of  the  hypothesis  forbid  this.  For  if  the  provi- 
sions made  for  the  education  of  man  are  the  out- 
come of  an  intelligence  higher  than  his,  it  follows 
that  there  will  be  some  adjustments,  some  relations 
of  more  or  less,  that  he  cannot  altogether  explain. 
But  so  far  as  the  general  scope  and  intention  is 
concerned,  the  truth  of  this  interpretation  will,  I 
think,  appear  increasingly  as  we  study  it  and 
submit  the  realities  of  history  and  current  experi- 
ence to  it. 


CHAPTER  X 

ANALOGY  FROM  THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM 

WHEN  we  were  outlining  the  analogy 
which  exhibits  the  points  of  resem- 
blance between  the  evolution  of  a 
human  body  and  that  of  the  social  organism,  our 
attention  was  directed  collectively  to  all  the 
classes  of  cells  that  contribute  of  their  diversity 
to  the  organized  unity.  The  contrasts  of  form 
and  function  which  these  different  orders  present 
are  an  apt  illustration  of  the  diversities  of  tempera- 
ment, aptitude,  ability,  ambition,  and  function 
with  which  we  are  familiar  in  the  human  con- 
stituents of  society.  But  now,  having  passed  from 
the  study  of  the  constitution  of  the  social  order  to 
the  question  of  its  meaning,  we  may  contract  the 
field,  and  avail  ourselves  of  the  analogies  afforded 
by  one  department,  or  class,  of  these  cells. 

I 

The  nervous  system  is  marked  off  from  all  the 
other  organic  agencies  that  serve  a  human  body 
by  radical  peculiarities.  It  is  as  much  above  all 
the  others  in  the  scale  of  being  as  man  is  above 
the  creatures  of  mechanical  routine.  As  matter 
of  fact  the  great  differences  which  exist  between 

190 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  191 

the  different  orders  of  animals  are  largely  condi- 
tioned upon  the  gradual  expansion  and  complexity 
of  organization  in  this  department.  It  is  the 
only  department  in  which  there  is  continual 
change,  in  which  there  is  a  progressive  creation  of 
new  forms  with  higher  functions,  and  in  which 
there  is  a  clearly  defined  subordination  of  orders 
which  have  been  successively  developed. 

" Every  tissue  of  the  body,"  we  are  told,  " ex- 
cept the  nervous  tissue,  has  but  one  dead  level 
of  function.  No  one  bone,  or  bone-cell,  has  any 
higher  rank  than  another  bone  or  bone-cell,  any 
more  than  one  brick  in  a  building  is  of  a  higher, 
or  more  important  grade,  than  another  brick, 
simply  because  it  is  put  above,  or  below."*  In 
the  nervous  system,  on  the  contrary,  there  is, 
just  as  in  human  society,  a  higher  and  a  lower 
order,  a  governing  and  a  governed,  a  class  that 
directs  and  controls,  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
subordinate  classes  that  carry  into  effect.  These 
latter  were  the  first  in  the  order  of  evolution. 
They  constituted  the  original,  comparatively 
simple  nervous  system,  which  responded  almost 
automatically  to  external  stimuli.  But,  with  the 
ascent  of  the  biological  scale,  a  superior  class  of 
cells  emerged  to  take  charge  of  the  more  complex 
situation.  It  is  the  office  of  these  cells  to  organ- 
ize, direct,  control,  and  educate  those  lower  in 
the  scale. 

*  "  Brain  and  Personality,"  by  W.  Hanna  Thomson,  M.D., 
LL.D.,  p.  137. 


192  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

With  reference  to  this  aspect  of  cell-life  the 
author  just  quoted  writes  as  follows:  "In  study- 
ing the  development  of  a  nervous  system  from  a 
physiological  point  of  view,  the  first  principle 
discernible  as  governing  that  development  is  what, 
in  any  other  connection,  we  should  term  discipline, 
and  we  cannot  do  better  than  to  note  how  the 
conceptions  suggested  by  that  word  are  applicable 
to  our  subject."  *  In  pursuance  of  this  applica- 
tion Dr.  Thomson  represents  the  superior  grey 
motor-cells  of  the  surface  of  the  brain  saying  to 
the  grey  motor-cells  of  the  spinal  cord,  "You 
were  the  original  nervous  system,  to  be  sure,  just 
as  there  were  horses  before  there  were  men  to 
ride  them,  but  since  I  have  come,  I  am  above  and 
you  are  below,  and  as  it  is,  it  took  long,  patient 
training  and  a  great  deal  of  trouble  to  break  you 
in  to  my  service  so  that  you  would  act  according 
to  my  orders."  | 

Somehow,  in  response  to  the  persistently  re- 
peated action  of  uniform  stimuli  proceeding  from 
the  superior  afferent  nerves,  there  are  formed  what 
are  called  nerve-centres,  or  ganglia,  character- 
ized by  an  ever-increasing  complexity  of  organiza- 
tion and  function.  These  are  the  physical  basis 
of  habits.  By  oft-repeated  stimuli  the  nerve- 
centres  have  been  organized  and  trained  to 
respond  through  the  efferent  nervous  system  in 
an  orderly  and  uniform  way.  The  results  are 
varied,  because  the  organization  is  as  complex  as 

*  Ibid.,  p.  134.  t  Ibid.,  p.  139. 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  193 

the  needs  of  the  organism  which  it  serves.  All 
our  vital  functions,  like  breathing,  the  beating  of 
the  heart,  etc.,  are  carried  on  automatically  by 
these  nerve-centres  that  have  been  trained  to 
habitual  action.  By  what  adaptive  intelligence 
these  wonderfully  complex  instrumentalities  have 
been  called  into  existence,  in  response  to  afferent- 
nerve  stimuli,  no  physiologist  can  begin  to  tell 
us.  In  the  whole  process  we  have  to  recognize  a 
creative  power  working  with  the  co-operative 
microscopic  beings  which  we  call  nerve-cells. 

Here,  as  elsewhere,  we  discern  that  power 
working,  not  by  itself  upon  unresponding  inactive 
material,  but,  always  in  conjunction  with  and 
through  active  agents.  And  here  again,  as  else- 
where, we  find  the  creative  process  not  only  a 
gradual,  but  also  an  educative  one.  The  devel- 
opment of  the  co-operating  cell,  even  though 
microscopic,  seems  to  be  one  of  the  ends  in 
view,  though  never  the  final  end.  Each  indi- 
vidual in  the  series  is  tributary  to  a  collective 
life  and  efficiency  beyond  itself,  and  each  unit 
of  organization  so  formed  is  again  tributary  to  a 
higher  organization  which  subserves  ends  of  larger 
significance  and  value. 

All  the  nervous  centres  of  which  we  have  spoken, 
each  one  a  most  elaborate  system  in  itself,  are 
spheres  of  organized  influence  that  have  been  so 
trained  to  habitual  correspondence  and  harmony 
of  action  that  they,  in  connection  with  the  afferent 
stimuli  from  the  outside  world,  carry  on  the  opera- 


194  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

tions  of  the  different  vital  processes  in  a  normal 
body  without  friction,  hesitation,  or  disturbance 
of  any  kind.  They  work  each  one  silently  and 
effectively;  and  so  perfectly  equal  are  they  to 
every  change  of  adjustment,  necessitated  by 
change  of  environment,  that  we  ordinarily  take 
no  note  of  them.  But,  with  all  this  elaborate- 
ness and  perfection,  they  are  but  factors  in  a 
grander  organization,  that  of  the  human  body  as 
a  whole,  which,  from  the  higher  point  of  view,  is 
seen  to  be  the  end  for  which  they  have  been  created 
and  educated.  Each  one  fits  into  its  place  in 
that  higher  unity,  subordinates  itself  to  its  re- 
quirements, works  harmoniously  with  all  the  other 
departments,  and  thus  prepares  a  perfected  living 
mechanism  to  be  taken  possession  of  by  that 
wonder  of  all  wonders,  —  a  human  consciousness. 
Where  does  this  new  factor,  this  new  controlling 
agent,  come  from?  How  does  this  one,  conscious, 
intelligent,  commanding  personality  spring  from 
the  multiplicity  with  which  it  is  vitally  connected 
and  over  which  it  is  placed  in  authority?  Does  it 
spring  from  it  at  all?  May  it  not  be  a  being  of  a 
different  order  sent  from  some  higher  centre  of 
power,  like  the  governor  of  a  dependent  province, 
to  look  after  and  be  responsible  for  its  interests? 
Whatever  the  truth  may  be  from  an  ontological 
point  of  view,  this  latter  conception,  from  a 
practical  point  of  view,  fits  the  situation  in  some 
important  respects.  True,  the  new-comer  is  not, 
at  his  advent,  in  control  of  the  situation.  He  is 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  195 

not  at  first  the  educator,  but  the  educated.  The 
whole  complex  organism  with  which  he  has  to  do 
and  on  which  he  is  dependent  is  in  perfect  run- 
ning order  when  he  comes  on  the  scene.  It  has, 
so  to  speak,  a  vast  experience  as  related  to  his 
inexperience.  He  has  at  first  to  be  its  pupil, 
and  only  gradually  reaches  a  position  of  knowl- 
edge and  mastery  that  fits  him  to  assume  the 
government. 

But,  when  this  stage  has  been  reached,  it  is 
manifest  that  he  is  the  end  for  which  all  this 
wonderful  complexity  of  organization  has  been 
elaborated.  Human  history  is  the  record  of  the 
use  that  individually  and  collectively  he  has  made 
of  his  power.  It  is  not,  however,  to  the  external 
evidences  of  his  achievements  that  our  attention 
must  be  directed  in  this  connection,  but  to  the 
more  intimate,  internal  relations  sustained  to  the 
world  of  nerve-cells  and  centres  which  he  not 
only  administers  and  governs,  but  the  organ- 
ization of  which  he  has  immensely  extended. 
Acquired  faculties  come  to  the  birth,  are  organ- 
ized, trained,  and  perfected  by  this  dominating 
personality,  and  each  one  of  these  is  physically 
represented  by  a  special  community  of  nerve-cells. 

Until  the  formation  of  these  acquired  faculties 
there  is  great  uniformity  in  the  nervous  system 
of  different  men.  But,  from  this  on,  there  is  the 
widest  diversity.  The  majority  of  men  build 
up  for  themselves  the  faculty  of  expressing 
themselves  in  language.  Many  organize  the  cell 


196  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

combinations  that  enable  them  to  interpret 
written  signs  and  those  that  give  them  the 
power  of  expression  by  the  same  means.  Be- 
yond these  acquisitions  the  nervous  systems  of 
individuals  become  separated  by  very  great 
divergencies.  One  constructs  within  his  cere- 
brum a  veritable  laboratory  for  the  working 
out  of  physical  problems,  another  a  study  stored 
with  volumes  for  the  writing  of  history  or 
philosophy;  another  has  acquired  an  organiza- 
tion that  makes  him  a  wonderful  dancer.  Every 
man  who  composes  music,  or  who  renders  it 
by  his  skill  as  a  vocalist  or  instrumentalist, 
has  built  up  for  himself  a  special  organism  of 
his  own  for  his  personal  use.  So  also  every 
one  who  has  developed  skill  in  any  kind  of 
occupation,  handicraft,  or  interest  has,  by  direct- 
ing attention  and  effort  in  a  given  direction, 
modified  the  nervous  mechanism  that  he  has 
inherited. 

In  all  this  diversity  we  see  the  results  of  human 
educational  methods  persistently  directed  to  spe- 
cial ends.  But  when,  advancing  a  step  farther, 
we  look  at  all  these  results  collectively,  and  seek 
to  carry  out  our  analogy  by  the  discovery  of  a 
still  higher  unity,  to  which  they  are  all  organically 
related,  we  find  ourselves  at  a  loss.  For  it  is  a 
unity  of  personality  that  we  are  seeking;  and  this 
the  social  organism  does  not  give  us.  All  its  values 
have  to  be  estimated  in  terms  of  the  human  in- 
dividual. Its  usefulness,  its  opportunities,  its 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  197 

happiness  are  nothing  except  as  they  are  realized 
by  its  separate  constituents.  It  is  indeed  a  most 
valuable  instrumentality  for  the  furtherance  of 
human  interests,  of  human  discipline,  of  human 
education,  but  it  is  nothing  more. 

Another  step  is  necessary.  We  have  seen  that, 
when  the  organization  of  the  human  body 
reached  a  certain  stage  of  perfection,  there 
appeared,  from  some  unknown  source,  a  mysteri- 
ous being  vitally  connected  with  it,  that  took 
possession  of  it,  ruled,  disciplined,  and  formed 
it.  Let  us  make  the  hypothesis  that  some  such 
being  exists  who  sustains  to  the  social  organism 
relations  similar  to  the  above,  —  that  the  human 
race,  as  a  whole,  is  related  to  this  being,  somewhat 
as  the  nervous  system  of  a  man  is  related  to  his 
central  consciousness  and  will.  This  hypothesis 
not  only  completes  the  analogy,  but  it  completes 
and  satisfies  the  requirements  of  the  great  process, 
the  coming  stage  of  which  we  seek  to  formulate. 

For  clearness  of  thought,  we  may  once  more 
narrow  the  field  of  our  analogy.  We  will  assume 
that  the  Supreme  Being  is  related  to  the  human 
race  as  a  human  person  is  related  to  some  one 
of  the  special  faculties  that  he  has  created  and 
trained  for  his  own  use.  This  places  no  limitation 
upon  the  thought  of  the  Supreme  One.  We  are 
but  a  department  of  His  universe,  one  of  His 
interests.  It  has,  on  the  other  hand,  the  advantage 
of  illustrating,  by  a  natural  process,  the  fact  and 
the  method  of  our  creation  by  Him  and,  further, 


198  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  His  continued  superintendence  and  co-opera- 
tion at  all  stages  of  the  process. 

The  history  of  any  one  of  our  brain  specializa- 
tions would  serve  our  purpose,  but  I  will  choose 
that  of  music,  not  alone  because  it  is  one  of  the 
most  elaborate  and  clearly  set  forth  as  to  its 
processes  in  our  consciousness,  but  also  because 
it  ranges  from  the  most  ordinary  levels  of  experi- 
ence, through  every  phase,  to  the  most  trans- 
cendent. We  can,  therefore,  trace  the  process  of 
education,  mark  its  stages,  and  see  how  each  one 
leads  up  to  that  which  is  intrinsically  higher  on 
the  scale  of  natures  and  values.  There  is  a 
foundation  for  music  in  our  physical  organiza- 
tions which  antedates  any  action  of  ours  with 
regard  to  it.  Its  beginnings  are  matters  of  vibra- 
tions, outside  the  organism,  which  are  responded 
to  by  afferent  nerves  and  conveyed  to  a  centre 
where  they  come  into  consciousness.  There  is 
no  music  until  this  consciousness  has  been  reached 
and  made  a  participating  factor  with  the  nerve- 
stimuli  that  have  led  up  to  it,  and  it  is  only  when 
attention  has  focalized  this  consciousness  that  the 
process  of  cell  education  in  which  we  are  interested 
begins. 

The  first  steps  are  experiments  in  sounds  and 
sound  combinations.  These  are  selected  from, 
remembered,  repeated  with  pleasure,  varied,  ex- 
panded, organized.  A  chord  is  a  distinct  achieve- 
ment, a  tune  is  a  wonderful  accomplishment. 
Each  has  a  raison  d'etre  and  completeness  in  itself. 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  199 

But  music  does  not  stop  there.  As  we  follow 
the  course  of  its  evolution  from  these  simple 
beginnings  through  a  long  and  elaborate  develop- 
ment as  a  great  science  and  art,  we  find  ourselves 
contemplating  a  microcosm  of  diversified  agencies 
which  has  a  certain  completeness  in  itself,  but 
also  an  incompleteness,  a  lack  of  finality,  in  view 
of  a  larger  unity  into  which  it  may  enter  as  a 
factor.  The  player  on  a  violin  has  constructed  a 
wonderful  nerve-organism  which  responds  to  his 
bidding  alone.  He  may  be  very  great  as  a  soloist. 
So  also  a  symphony  by  a  great  master  is  a  crea- 
tion that  stands  out  clear  in  its  separateness  as 
a  finality.  It  has  its  own  completeness.  But 
every  soloist,  composer,  and  composition  is  also 
a  link  in  an  endless  chain  of  development. 

Even  when  we  contemplate  this  great  depart- 
ment of  human  achievement  as  a  whole  we  may 
take  very  narrow  views  of  it.  It  is  in  one  aspect 
a  science,  and  all  its  agencies  and  outcomes  may 
be  expressed  in  the  terms  of  science.  In  another 
aspect  it  is  an  art,  to  be  judged  and  regulated 
and  cultivated  in  accordance  with  the  canons  of 
art.  But,  in  a  higher  sense,  it  is  a  medium  of 
expression  for  the  most  exalted  thought  and  feel- 
ing. And,  more  than  this,  it  passes  over  from 
the  role  of  instrumentality  to  that  of  leadership 
and  becomes  the  pioneer  in  realms  that  transcend 
our  experience.  It  carries  us  whither  no  language 
can  follow  it;  it  becomes  a  most  potent  revealer 
of  the  ideal. 


200  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

But,  in  the  face  of  this  grand  reality  of  develop- 
ment, we  have  to  recognize  the  fact  that  all  great 
musical  creations,  both  as  regards  composition 
and  performance,  have  to  come  back  to  the 
individual,  the  human  person,  for  their  origin  and 
for  their  interpretation.  Unless  we  recognize  the 
existence  of  a  higher  personality  in  whom  all 
these  human  combinations  centre  and  find  their 
meaning,  they  are  unattached,  floating,  evanescent 
dreams,  vaporous  emanations  from  the  persons 
with  whom  we  can  connect  them.  They  are 
human  personality  rendered  with  variations,  and 
not  to  be  taken  seriously. 

Just  so,  when  we  contemplate  the  more  com- 
prehensive social  organism.  There  is  before  us 
a  most  impressive  world  of  reality  that  has  come 
into  existence  as  the  result  of  the  corporate  life 
of  innumerable  human  beings.  But  the  origin 
and  significance  of  it  all,  unless  we  postulate  some 
higher  personality,  must  be  referred  back  to  hu- 
man persons.  We  cannot  say  that  it  centres 
in  them,  for  it  finds  no  centre,  no  interpretation 
in  the  little  world  out  of  which  it  has  sprung 
and  which  it  has  far  transcended.  The  corporate 
life  that  so  strongly  suggests  an  organism  has  no 
real  unity  in  itself.  It  foreshadows  such  a  unity, 
preaches  it  to  us  every  day  of  our  lives  by  its 
manifest  tendencies,  its  repetition  of  analogies, 
its  unattached,  inconclusive,  unmeaning  issues, 
its  constant  demands  for  a  realization  that  cannot 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  201 

be  supplied.  But  the  moment  we  supply  that 
missing  factor  of  a  superior  being,  to  whom  we 
sustain  vital  relations,  the  situation  is  transformed. 
Order  emerges,  the  unmeaning  finds  its  perfect 
solution,  the  unattached  its  fitting  attachments, 
the  unfulfilled  its  way  of  fulfilment. 

As  in  the  field  of  music  all  the  curiously  formed 
instruments  for  its  production,  all  the  elaborate 
nerve-organisms  in  myriads  of  individuals  for  its 
understanding  and  its  rendering,  all  the  great 
compositions  and  orchestras  and  composers,  are 
seen  to  be,  in  their  wider  relations,  only  instru- 
mentalities for  the  development  and  education 
of  the  human  soul  as  related  to  the  supreme  soul, 
so  the  great  corporate  life  of  humanity  as  a  whole 
is  seen  to  be  pre-eminently  and  essentially  a  great 
training  school  by  which  the  human  is  led  up  to 
a  progressive  comprehension  of  and  union  with 
the  divine. 

In  the  knowledge  of  our  relations  to  that  higher 
life  we  first  begin  really  to  live.  We  project  our- 
selves, our  thoughts,  our  hopes,  our  ambitions, 
our  affections,  all  that  is  highest  and  best  in  our 
aspirations,  into  that  larger  life,  to  which  we  are 
tributary,  of  which  we  are  part,  which  we  can 
serve,  whose  battles  we  can  help  to  fight,  toward 
which  all  our  emotions  of  loyalty  and  love  and 
worship  may  find  their  full  and  inexhaustible 
satisfaction.  This  is  not  a  future  to  which  we 
are  looking  forward,  a  life  to  be  lived  in  another 
world.  It  is  the  living  present.  The  life  that 


202  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

has  hitherto  found  its  attachments  only  in  hu- 
man persons  and  interests  is  transformed  by  it, 
becomes,  in  embryo,  that  of  a  new  creature. 

But  now,  let  us  ask,  how  does  this  affect  our 
conception  of  and  our  attitude  toward  the  social 
organism?  Does  it  become  a  thing  of  small 
importance  in  our  eyes  because  we  have  found 
out  that  it  is  not  the  final  end  of  existence?  On 
the  contrary,  our  discovery  invests  it  for  the  first 
time  with  elements  of  nobility  and  with  values  of 
incalculable  significance;  for  it  is  vitally  related  to 
a  transcendent  life  in  which  we  find  the  meaning 
and  fulfilment  of  ours.  It  is  the  instrumentality, 
the  school  organized  by  infinite  wisdom,  to  educate 
us  for  that  life.  But,  while  it  is  this,  it  has,  at  the 
same  time,  a  significance  and  completeness  of  its 
own.  It  is  an  interest  to  be  lived  for  on  its  own 
account,  since  we,  also,  are  its  makers  and 
measurably  responsible  for  it. 

It  is  the  joint  outcome  of  the  co-operative 
working  of  God  and  man  within  that  environ- 
ment of  uniformity  which  we  call  the  order  of 
nature.  It  is  ordained  of  God,  it  is  built  up  by 
man,  half  blindly,  half  intelligently,  in  response 
to  constraining  influences  that  he  dimly  recognizes. 
We  cannot  definitely  analyze  this  co-operative 
working.  We  cannot  say  God  has  worked  alone 
here,  man  has  worked  alone  there,  or  that,  in  this 
other  matter,  they  have  worked  together.  Under 
the  guidance  of  analogy  we  construe  the  great 
stream  of  uniform  influences  as  the  habitual 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  203 

working  of  the  Divine  Wisdom  in  conformity  to 
the  nature  of  things.  And  at  certain  points  we 
think  we  recognize  the  initiative  of  the  divine,  or 
of  the  human,  in  new  departures. 

II 

Let  us  now  return  to  trace,  along  the  line  of  our 
analogy,  the  development  of  the  social  organism 
and  some  of  its  characteristics.  For  the  same 
analogy  that  we  have  used  to  illustrate  the  con- 
stitution of  the  social  order  throws  light  upon  the 
process  of  its  becoming. 

That  stage  of  evolution  which  is  represented 
by  a  community  of  cells,  each  one  of  which  closely 
resembles  every  other,  is  a  striking  illustration 
of  primitive  society.  One  man  may  differ  from 
another  in  his  power  of  domination,  but  this  is  a 
matter  of  degree,  not  of  radical  difference.  It  is 
only  when  a  man  arises  possessed  of  a  new  idea, 
a  hitherto  non-existent  formation  of  brain,  that 
the  differentiation  on  which  the  social  order  is 
based  begins.  When  such  a  man  appears,  he  is, 
as  related  to  the  uniformity  which  surrounds  him, 
a  freak  of  nature,  and  he  is  so  regarded  by  his 
fellows.  They  may  worship  him,  but  that  is 
usually  an  afterthought.  At  first  they  are  inclined 
to  fear  and  persecute  him.  He  is  abnormal  and 
not  to  be  tolerated.  Sometimes  he  is  dragged 
outside  the  camp  and  stoned;  sometimes  he  is 
permitted  to  live  out  his  life  with  his  developing 
idea  for  company. 


204  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

In  this  latter  case  he  sometimes  leaves  behind 
him  a  permanent  modification  of  primitive  con- 
ditions. He  has  brought  forth  something,  some 
invention,  or  some  thought,  the  value  of  which 
others  have  recognized  and  which  enters  into  the 
race  as  a  new,  persistent  factor.  Every  repetition 
of  this  process  makes  the  nascent  society  a  little 
more  complex,  and  we  seem  to  see  in  it  a  rehearsal 
of  that  orderly  succession  of  creations  by  which 
the  human  body  has  come  to  be  what  it  is. 

But  the  whole  process  is  different  in  that  we 
can  more  clearly  trace,  all  the  way  along,  the 
influence  of  each  of  the  associated  agencies  that 
have  been  at  work.  So  far  as  details  are  concerned 
we  are  often  hi  doubt,  but  of  certain  main  ten- 
dencies we  can  be  tolerably  sure.  The  initiative 
of  the  whole  movement  must  be  traced  to  that 
instinct,  that  passion  for  self-realization,  which 
distinguishes  man  from  all  that  is  not  man.  This 
God-implanted  instinct  is  the  source  of  all  human 
development,  social  as  well  as  individual.  The 
new  growth  has  been  along  individual  lines,  but 
the  organization  has  been  largely  effected  by  non- 
human  constraining  influences.  Only  at  a  some- 
what advanced  stage  of  the  process  does  man 
begin  to  be  conscious  of  the  social  order  as  some- 
thing which  he  has  had  a  hand  in  creating  and 
for  which  he  is  in  a  measure  responsible.  But  if, 
with  this  discovery,  he  jumps  to  the  conclusion 
that  he  is  the  sole  author  of  it  and  that  he  can 
destroy  with  impunity  that  which  he  has  uncon- 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  205 

sciously  constructed,  he  is  labouring  under  a  fatal 
mistake. 

The  principles  of  this  social  order  are  the 
outcome  of  a  wisdom  far  exceeding  his,  and 
experience  teaches  him  that  they  are  as  stable  and 
as  coercive  as  the  fundamental  laws  of  nature. 
They  are,  in  fact,  no  other  than  what  we  call  the 
laws  of  nature.  The  social  order  is  the  natural 
order.  There  is  a  certain  amount  of  elasticity  to 
it.  Important  modifications  in  the  adjustment 
of  its  details  are  possible  and  desirable.  It  is  the 
problem  of  our  lives  to  study  and  find  out  how 
best  to  make  them.  But  we  cannot  go  far  in  any 
direction  without  coming  up  against  principles,  to 
violate  which  means  only  social  annihilation. 

We  have  the  same  kind  of  liberty  under  the 
unwritten  laws  of  organized  society  that  we  have 
under  the  laws  of  agriculture,  or  the  laws  that 
govern  the  well-being  of  a  human  body.  We  can 
accomplish  great  things  while  we  work  in  harmony 
with  these  laws,  supplementing,  guiding,  control- 
ling their  action,  but  if  we  disregard  them,  they 
work  against  instead  of  for  us.  It  is  not  difficult 
for  us  to  draw  up,  from  the  standpoint  of  what  we 
think  ought  to  be  and  might  be,  a  formidable  ar- 
raignment of  the  situation  in  which  the  human  race 
finds  itself.  It  is  easy  to  show  how  things  might 
have  been  more  wisely  arranged.  But,  when  our 
radically  new  devices  are  put  to  the  test  of  human 
experience,  we  are  continually  scourged  back  to  the 
methods  which  we  had  thought  to  supersede. 


206  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

The  training  school  organized  by  an  intelligence 
higher  than  ours,  whatever  may  be  said  in  criticism 
of  it,  works  better  than  our  inventions,  and  the 
curriculum  of  experience  is  recognized,  in  the  long 
run,  as  the  only  thoroughly  trustworthy  one.  It 
is  severe,  but  it  is  effective.  It  has  produced  and 
is  continually  producing  tragic  failures,  it  involves 
much  incidental  suffering;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
everything  that  is  of  value  in  human  life  and 
thought  and  feeling  is  its  outcome.  Life  is  good 
for  nothing  when  we  once  get  out  of  this  school 
of  character.  True,  one  of  the  great  incentives 
to  human  effort  is  to  get  out  of  it,  to  achieve  an 
independence  of  its  coercions  and  become  each  one 
his  own  master.  But  if,  when  we  have  thrown 
off  the  harness  of  necessity,  we  neglect  to  harness 
ourselves,  in  some  sort,  the  zest  and  the  value  of 
life  is  gone.  We  must  lay  hold  of  some  worthy 
interest  and  make  it  ours,  fall  in  love  with  some 
end,  or  ideal,  to  which  we  can  give  a  whole-souled 
devotion,  otherwise,  there  sets  in  a  natural  de- 
generation, physical,  mental,  and  spiritual;  in 
fact,  we  begin  to  die. 

By  rising  above  the  coercions  of  necessity  we 
have  only  entered  an  advanced  form,  a  higher 
grade,  —  a  most  perilous  situation  for  those  who 
are  not  alive  to  its  opportunities  and  responsi- 
bilities. We  shall  never,  perhaps,  at  least  from 
our  present  plane  of  existence,  be  able  to  see  why 
the  tasks  set  in  the  great  school  might  not  have 
been  made  something  less  severe,  the  assistance 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  207 

given  to  those  on  the  verge  of  discouragement 
more  timely.  And,  from  the  standpoint  of  this 
inability  to  fathom  the  ways  of  the  Almighty,  the 
most  searching  questions  are  urged  upon  those 
who  would  defend  the  doctrine  of  the  goodness 
of  God. 

Why,  it  is  asked,  if  a  benevolent  intelligence  is 
responsible  for  the  existing  order,  was  the  true 
and  normal  way  of  living  left  in  such  obscurity 
and  made  so  perilously  difficult?  Why  has  man, 
formed  for  intelligence,  for  morality,  for  happi- 
ness, been  so  long  on  his  blundering  way  to  a 
realization  that  ever  recedes  before  him?  Could 
not  man  and  his  environment  have  been  so 
adjusted  to  each  other  as  to  ensure  prosperity, 
peace,  tranquillity,  contentment,  and  the  kindly 
relations  between  man  and  man  that  naturally 
flow  from  such  a  condition  of  things? 

To  put  it  reasonably,  why  was  not  the  human 
race,  from  the  beginning,  so  constituted  and  so 
related  to  its  environment  that  a  form  of  society 
like  the  best  that  we  have  realized  and  proved 
to  be  possible  should  have  been  quickly  reached 
and  retained?  Why  were  the  abnormal  ways  of 
squandering  life  made  so  attractive?  Why  were 
the  right  and  the  wrong  so  inextricably  mixed  up 
that  nothing  seems  altogether  right  or  altogether 
wrong,  but  only  a  matter  of  degree,  of  more  or 
less,  of  moderation  or  excess?  Why  should  the 
way  of  honest  ambition,  the  impulse  to  realize 
our  powers,  sweep  us,  so  often  under  full  headway, 


208  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

to  a  moral  catastrophe?  Why  is  the  civilized 
world  to-day,  with  all  its  long  experience  and 
conflicts,  its  many  and  exhausting  attempts  to 
improve  itself,  in  a  condition  that  in  some  ways 
seems  more  difficult  and  more  hopeless,  in  its 
ever-increasing  complexity,  than  in  the  days  of 
its  greater  simplicity? 

These  are  tremendous  questions,  and  it  is 
neither  useless  nor  impious  for  us  to  ask  them. 
God,  Who  has  formed  us  not  to  be  dumb,  driven 
cattle,  must  intend  us  to  ask  them  and  to  work 
at  the  solution  of  the  problems  they  suggest.  We 
may  be  very  sure  that  none  of  the  answers  we 
give  will  be  final,  that  the  future  of  the  world 
will  modify  them,  but  we  may  be  sure  also  that 
we  shall  continually  move  toward  a  solution  so 
long  as  we  stick  to  the  hypothesis  that  exhibits 
the  existing  social  order  as  a  great  training  school. 
Whatever  else  it  may  be,  it  certainly  is  this;  and 
by  the  recognition  of  the  fact,  every  one  of  these 
questions  is,  so  to  speak,  loosened.  The  hard 
knots  into  which  the  reverse  hypothesis  has  drawn 
them  give  way.  The  gravest  difficulties  of  the 
situation  are  seen  to  have  their  ground  in  an 
unwarranted  assumption,  —  the  assumption,  that 
is,  that  the  end  of  social  evolution  is,  or  ought  to 
be,  the  comfort,  the  happiness,  the  freedom  from 
care,  anxiety,  or  friction  of  the  whole  community. 

Our  view  of  the  situation  sees  in  the  absence  of 
contentment,  of  completeness,  and  of  peace  the 
conditions  that  make  for  the  highest  well-being 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  209 

of  the  race.  The  greatest  gifts,  those  of  inex- 
haustible value  to  humanity,  are  its  wants,  its 
dissatisfactions.  All  those  things  that  we  have 
been  demanding  as  our  moral  right  are  seen  to  be 
the  prizes  held  up  to  stimulate  our  efforts,  they 
are  purposely  put  beyond  our  reach,  with  all  sorts 
of  difficulties  to  be  overcome  before  we  can  enter 
upon  the  enjoyment  of  them.  And  this,  because 
the  great  end  to  be  attained  is  not  our  enjoyment 
of  them,  but  the  development  of  man  into  a 
creature  of  a  nobler  and  higher  type. 

Except  for  the  briefest  intervals  we  never 
quite  overtake  our  dreams  of  happiness.  The 
permanency  they  seemed  to  promise  is  never 
realized.  It  is  always  the  beyond  that  we  live 
for  and  worship.  We  are  by  nature  insatiable, 
and  the  world  in  which  we  live  is  wonderfully 
well  calculated  to  stimulate  our  desires  and  lure 
us  on.  And  what  is  true  of  the  individual  is 
equally  true,  and  of  the  same  significance,  in  the 
evolution  of  the  social  order. 

The  dreams  of  a  perfected  social  organism,  of  a 
millennium  of  peace  and  tranquillity,  of  social 
equality  and  fraternity,  in  which  every  one  is 
satisfied,  bear  the  same  relation  to  reality  that  is 
born  by  those  other  visions  that  sometimes  keep 
the  individual  man  steady  to  one  purpose  through 
a  lifetime  for  the  realization  of  a  condition  that 
never  materializes.  Neither  in  the  one  case  nor 
in  the  other,  are  these  dreams  realities  to  be  pos- 
sessed and  enjoyed.  They  are  ideals  to  be 

14 


210  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

worked  for,  ideals  adjusted 'to  our  very  limited 
understanding.  And  being  so  adjusted,  they  are 
continually  readjusting  themselves  as  we  approach 
and  seem  about  to  grasp  them. 

Is  this  world  then  all  a  system  of  cleverly 
framed  delusions?  Are  we  doomed  to  be  for  ever 
striving  toward  ends  that  will  cease  to  interest 
us  as  soon  as  we  have  compassed  them?  It  is, 
indeed,  truly  so.  No  fact,  nor  class  of  facts,  is 
more  clearly  and  incontestably  established  in  the 
experience  of  the  human  race  than  this.  "  Vanity 
of  vanities,  all  is  vanity,  saith  the  preacher." 

But  this  is  not  the  whole  truth.  Though  we 
may  not  realize  our  dreams,  our  labour  has  not 
been  in  vain.  Though  the  special  satisfactions 
on  which  we  had  set  our  hearts  have  not  been 
accomplished,  many  other  things  have  been,  — 
matters  of  far  greater  and  more  enduring 
value.  And  without  entering  into  detail,  we 
may  comprehend  many  of  these  in  that  one  word 
education,  character-forging. 

I  say  many,  not  all,  for  whoever  labours  wisely 
for  the  achievement  of  personal  or  social  ends 
adds  something  to  the  solidity  and  effectiveness 
of  the  instrumentalities  by  which  we  live.  To 
do  this,  to  build  up,  improve,  and  fortify  the 
social  order  is  one  of  the  great  ends  of  human 
existence.  Though  not  the  final,  it  is  the  proxi- 
mate end.  To  labour  wisely  for  this,  to  discern 
truthfully  the  particular  part  which  we  are 
fitted  to  play  in  it,  and  to  perform  this  faithfully, 


THE  NERVOUS  SYSTEM  211 

in  the  consciousness  of  our  corporate  implica- 
tions and  responsibilities,  is  to  honour  the  life 
that  has  been  given  us  and  to  live  in  harmony 
with  the  supreme  intelligence  that  has  ordained 
and  superintended  it. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE    GREAT    IDEAL 

ASSUMING  then,  that  the  social  order 
in  which  we  find  ourselves  is  not,  even 
in  its  greatest  perfection,  the  goal  of 
evolution,  but  an  instrumentality,  a  great  train- 
ing school,  the  next  question  is,  For  what  does 
it  train  us?  What  values  in  the  immediate  or 
remote  future  can  we  conceive  as  adequate  to 
justify  the  severe  discipline  to  which  we  are 
subjected?  It  might  be  replied  at  once  that 
character  in  itself  is  an  acquisition  of  inestimable 
value.  But  even  so,  something  more  needs  to 
be  supplied.  Character,  without  something  in 
which  it  can  realize  itself,  is  a  mere  abstraction. 
There  must  be  an  objective  reality  of  adequate 
worth  to  which  it  can  be  applied,  or  it  is  a  barren 
concept. 

It  might  indeed  seem,  at  first  sight,  as  if  the 
results  reached  in  the  foregoing  chapter  ren- 
dered valueless  any  attempt  to  answer  this 
question.  If,  as  we  have  said,  this  world  is  a 
system  of  cleverly  framed  delusions  calculated  to 
lure  us  on  to  continued  achievement,  if  we  are 
for  ever  leaving  our  imagined  heavens  behind  us, 

212 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  213 

of  what  use  can  any  speculation  of  ours  be?  Even 
if  a  divine  seer  could  put  before  us  a  true  descrip- 
tion of  some  remote  stage  of  the  higher  type 
toward  which  we  are  moving,  is  there  any  likeli- 
hood that,  from  our  present  standpoint,  we 
should  be  able  to  understand  its  value,  or  attrac- 
tiveness? We  may,  indeed,  on  the  ground  of 
continuity,  analogically  construct  a  scheme  of 
probabilities  with  regard  to  the  proximate  stages 
of  the  future.  We  may  vision  forth  a  social 
organism  on  a  higher  plane,  in  which  each  one 
who  has  acquitted  himself  well  on  earth  will 
find  himself  promoted,  with  re-enforced  powers, 
to  a  sphere  of  enlarged  activities  and  increased 
responsibilities.  But  this  does  not  fill  the  require- 
ments. It  belongs  still  to  the  category  of  instru- 
mentalities. Though  the  promotion  be  from  the 
custody  of  one  pound  to  that  of  authority  over 
ten  cities,  it  still  appeals  to  the  imagination  as  a 
matter  of  more  or  less. 

I 

What  we  want  to  find  is  the  one  supreme, 
all-embracing  interest  that  is  and  always  will  be 
worth  while,  —  the  ever-enduring,  inexhaustible 
satisfaction.  Can  we  discover  any  way  of  ap- 
proach to  an  understanding  of  this?  Some- 
times, when  the  main  and  obvious  and  apparently 
only  road  to  a  place  is  hopelessly  barred  against 
us,  it  happens  that  a  side-road,  unpretentious, 
unobserved,  and  roundabout,  will  bring  us  to 


214  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

the  goal  of  our  desires.  This  is  not  the  first 
impasse  of  thought  that  we  have  encountered  in 
the  course  of  our  discussion.  Let  us  bring  to 
bear  upon  it  the  method  by  which  these  others 
have  been  reduced.  We  have  seen  that  some 
of  the  most  obstinate  cases  of  this  kind  are 
rooted  in  a  false  analogy.  May  it  not  be  so 
here? 

The  little  word  end  has,  in  this  connection, 
much  to  answer  for.  It  is  a  word  that  we  use, 
and  shall  probably  continue  to  use,  as  a  synonym 
for  purpose  without  meaning  all  that  it  implies, 
and  yet  our  thought  is  influenced  by  its  implica- 
tions. We  say  "  the  end  toward  which  we  move." 
We  may  not  think  of  that  end  as  a  finality,  but 
yet  the  suggestion  of  finality  attaches  to  it. 
The  word,  of  course,  is  not  altogether  responsible. 
We  have  made  choice  of  it  for  this  purpose  be- 
cause we  have  somehow  formed  the  habit  of 
thinking  of  the  future  statically,  of  imagining  a 
definite,  fixed  condition  as  the  goal  which  will 
finish  our  labours  and  satisfy  us. 

Now,  let  us  change  the  conception.  Instead 
of  asking  "to  what  all-desirable  end  does  evolu- 
tion carry  us,"  let  us  ask  to  what  sublime  and 
all-satisfying  activity  does  it  seem  to  point. 
I  think  we  shall  find  this  workable.  In  the  first 
place,  it  is  a  conception  fully  in  harmony  with 
evolution.  Abandoning  the  idea  of  fixedness, 
which  was  the  essence  of  the  old  thought,  it  takes 
a  firm  grip  on  the  great  reality  of  this  world  as 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  215 

a  world  of  movement.  And  at  once  our  personal 
recollections  of  past  experiences  jump  to  the 
endorsement  of  this  construction.  For  our  great- 
est satisfactions  have  been  always,  somehow, 
linked  with  our  activities,  and  somehow,  also, 
they  have  faded  out  with  the  decline  of  those 
activities.  It  is  true  that  one  of  the  most  accepted 
and  cherished  thoughts  of  a  better  world  is  that 
it  will  be  a  place  of  rest.  But  this  is  only  a  pro- 
visional conception.  Rest  prolonged  beyond  the 
time  of  necessary  recuperation  becomes  restless- 
ness. There  is  nothing  abiding  in  it.  Just  rest 
enough  to  give  a  renewed  zest  to  activity  is  all 
that  we  can  make  use  of  in  this  world  or  another. 

Following  then  the  lead  of  this  idea,  that  our 
earthly  training  will  find  its  application  in  some 
unique  and  very  exalted  form  of  soul  activity, 
our  first  step  may  profitably  be  an  inquiry  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  satisfaction  which  we  derive 
from  our  ordinary  activities.  As  these  range  all 
the  way  from  those  that  are  purely  physical  to 
those  which  are  almost  as  purely  spiritual,  our 
inquiry  might  seem  to  have  an  interminable 
outlook.  But  it  is  only  to  one  particular  charac- 
teristic of  our  activities  that  I  wish  to  call  atten- 
tion, namely,  that  they  yield  their  greatest 
values  to  us  as  side  issues. 

In  our  efforts  to  grasp  life's  prizes  there  is  a 
continual  recurrence  of  certain  secondary  products 
that  are  not  disappointing.  They  cannot  disap- 
point us  because  we  have  had  no  expectations 


216  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

with  regard  to  them.  They  flow  in,  as  it  were, 
from  the  side.  If,  when  our  attention  is  called 
to  them,  we  try  to  make  them  the  direct  object 
of  our  designed  activities,  they  are  capable  of 
disappointing  us,  like  anything  else.  They  are 
the  rewards  of  earnest  striving  for  the  achieve- 
ment of  other  interests.  They  come  to  an  end, 
it  is  true,  when  the  particular  form  of  activity,  in 
connection  with  which  they  have  been  generated, 
ceases.  But  they  spring  up  anew  with  each  new 
pursuit,  and  their  cessation  in  each  case  leaves 
no  bitterness  behind  it.  The  memory  of  them  is 
purely  one  of  happiness.  Although  the  fruit  for 
which  we  climbed  was  not  worth  while,  the 
remembrance  of  the  climb  is  exhilarating. 

"The  Preacher,"  who  proclaimed  all  things 
to  be  but  vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit,  made, 
in  the  same  connection,  admissions  that  fatally 
discredit  his  aspersions  of  life.  In  each  quest  to 
which  he  addressed  himself  he  declares  that  he 
received  great  satisfaction  during  all  the  period 
of  his  approach  to  the  object  of  his  desire.  Every 
hour  of  his  working  toward  each  of  his  prospective 
ends  paid  him  his  reward,  in  good  coin,  which  he 
took  and  appropriated.  His  heart  "rejoiced  in 
his  labour,"  a  rejoicing  that  might  have  been 
continued  indefinitely  and  increasingly  had  he  not 
been  so  unfortunate  as  to  out-fly  his  quarry 
and  put  it  to  death.  There  are  two  points  which 
this  aspect  of  life  opens  for  our  consideration. 

First,    that    this    experience   of    the   Preacher 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  217 

emphasizes  a  great  principle  of  life,  one  that  is 
limited  to  no  one  class  of  experiences,  but  is  true 
in  every  department  of  our  manifold  activity. 
Let  us  formulate  it  in  some  such  hypothesis  as 
the  following:  Progressive  being  and  progressive 
satisfaction  in  being  are  to  be  looked  for  in  the  line 
of  life's  side  issues. 

Without  minimizing  the  importance  of  the 
direct  outcome  of  our  ambitions,  we  may  safely 
say  that  as  related  to  the  great  end  of  life  they 
are  of  subsidiary  value,  means  to  an  end  —  the 
end  being  the  increase  and  perfection  of  being. 
Every  faculty  normally  exercised  tends  to  become 
something  higher  in  the  scale  of  being.  Its 
range  is  increased;  it  grows  stronger,  finer, 
quicker  in  its  response  to  other  faculties,  and  ever 
more  firmly  integrated  as  a  vital  part  of  the  or- 
ganism to  which  it  belongs.  So  also  with  the 
organism  as  a  whole.  The  cumulative  effect  of 
its  efforts  in  the  various  directions  of  its  activity 
raises  it,  by  a  series  of  unmarked  gradations,  till 
it  has  come  to  belong  to  a  superior  order.  That 
this  is  the  purpose  of  the  great  process,  that  for 
which  it  exists,  is  made  increasingly  probable 
by  the  fact  that  it  is  accompanied  by  happiness. 

This  is  nature's  endorsement  of  its  normality. 
In  its  lower  ranges  this  consciousness  of  well- 
being,  of  progressive  becoming,  may  yield  a 
happiness  only  somewhat  higher  than  that  of 
healthily  developing  animals.  In  its  higher  ranges 
it  is  the  underlying  source  of  the  deepest  satis- 


218  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

factions  that  human  beings  can  experience.  We 
have  then  a  gradation  of  happiness,  the  degrees 
of  which  correspond  to  the  successive  stages  of 
growth.  And,  if  we  may  find  ourselves  justified 
in  postulating  an  unending  ascent  in  the  scale 
of  being,  for  the  human  personality  that  keeps 
its  place  in  the  line  of  promotion,  we  have  a  good 
basis  for  a  definite  hypothesis  as  to  the  future  of 
evolution. 

It  will,  I  think,  clear  the  atmosphere,  at  this 
point,  if  we  address  ourselves  to  an  examination 
of  the  kind  of  satisfaction  that  attends  the  con- 
sciousness of  progressive  being;  for  it  has  elements 
that  are  clearly  distinguishable.  In  the  first 
place  there  is  in  it  that  element  which,  in  the 
widest  signification,  we  may  call  worship,  and  in 
the  second  place  there  is  the  sense  of  movement 
toward  something  better,  the  exhilaration  of  ac- 
quisition and  attainment.  Both  are  elemental 
in  human  nature.  They  are  referrible  to  nothing 
lying  behind  them  save  the  great  intelligence  that 
has  implanted  all  our  enduring  instincts.  Both 
are  essential  to  the  highest  well-being.  The 
first  belongs  to  the  region  of  ideals,  the  second 
has  regard  to  the  pursuit  of  them.  All  along  the 
course  of  soul  development  they  work  together. 
The  ideal  gives  rise  to  the  pursuit.  The  pursuit, 
in  turn,  causes  the  ideal  to  deepen  and  expand 
and  to  hold  the  soul  with  an  ever  firmer  grip. 

I  have  called  the  first  worship,  because  that 
word  alone,  by  including  the  lower  as  well  as  the 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  219 

higher  forms  of  human  devotion,  expresses  the 
continuity  of  that  principle  which  I  believe  to  be 
the  motive  power  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  end 
of  evolution.  The  use  of  such  a  word  will  seem 
no  doubt  to  strike  a  strange  note  when  applied 
to  the  subordinate  pursuits  of  our  ordinary  lives. 

Worship,  to  our  ordinary  thinking,  dwells  in  a 
place  apart.  It  is  a  transcendent  activity  of  the 
soul,  if  it  be  real;  a  solemn  and  perhaps  weari- 
some observance,  if  it  is  a  mere  formality. .  What 
we  call  public  worship,  represented  by  innumerable 
churches,  exalted  music  and  psalmody,  an  army 
of  priests  and  supporting  worshippers,  is  a  depart- 
ment of  life  quite  separate  from  the  world  of  our 
daily  strivings.  But  there  is  another  significa- 
tion to  the  word.  There  is  a  worship  that  finds 
its  expression  not  only  through  established  forms, 
but  more  essentially  and  helpfully  in  every  experi- 
ence of  life.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  time  or  place, 
of  "this  mountain  or  Jerusalem,"  but  the  joyous 
uplifting  of  the  soul  that,  always  and  everywhere, 
worships  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 

With  this  signification  the  sphere  of  worship 
is  immeasurably  widened.  The  word  connotes 
not  alone  a  specific  act,  a  rite  observed,  a  duty 
performed,  not  merely  an  exalted,  but  occasional 
and  specialized,  experience,  but,  rather,  an  atti- 
tude of  soul,  an  abiding  passion,  a  specialized 
life,  a  new  being.  But  even  this  enlarged  con- 
ception fails  to  exhaust  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
or  to  express  the  far-reaching  influence  of  the 


220  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

principle  which  underlies  it.  That  energy  of  the 
soul  which,  when  it  is  directed  to  the  supreme 
ideal  we  call  distinctively  worship,  has  innumerable 
manifestations.  It  is  not  a  mere  figure  of  speech 
when  we  say  that  a  man  worships  power  or  wealth, 
his  dream  or  his  profession.  Not  all  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  higher  worship  are  there,  but  the 
moving  principle  is;  and  when  the  same  principle 
rises  to  higher  ranges,  its  transformation  is  the 
result  of  the  different  nature  of  that  on  which  it 
expends  itself. 

We  have  therefore  a  gradation  of  worships, 
illustrated  not  alone  in  the  successive  develop- 
ment of  distinctive  religions,  but  also  more  clearly 
and  vitally  hi  the  quality  of  the  ambitions  and 
quests  that  constitute  the  great  volume  of  pro- 
gressive life  which  we  call  human  evolution. 

It  is  a  principle  which  so  far  as  we  know  is 
peculiar  to  man.  That  is,  we  have  no  evidence 
that  the  animals  lower  in  the  scale  share  it  to 
any  great  degree.  Or,  if  they  do,  it  is  probably 
unconscious,  —  not  a  matter  on  which  they  can 
reflect.  The  look  of  devotion  with  which  a  dog 
regards  his  master  does,  indeed,  suggest  the 
worship  of  a  person.  The  ambition  of  a  horse  to 
be  swifter  than  all  other  horses,  and  the  collapse 
of  his  spirit  when  it  is  proved  that  he  is  not,  is 
akin  to  the  worship  of  an  ideal,  and  the  skylark 
pouring  out  its  heart  as  it  soars  into  the  heavens 
seems  the  exultant  expression  of  it.  But  man, 
looking  before  and  after,  not  only  becomes  con- 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  221 

scious  of  his  ideals,  he,  more  or  less  consciously, 
creates  and  fosters  them. 

As  soon  as  creature  wants  are  supplied  the  man 
who  has  the  seeds  of  development  in  him  begins 
to  reach  out  to  something  higher.  There  is  some 
sort  of  a  vision.  It  may  be  that  of  power,  of 
feeling  himself  to  be  greater,  more  influential, 
more  forceful  than  those  about  him.  It  may  be 
the  vision  of  accumulation  and  possession;  it 
may  be  that  of  creation,  the  ambition  of  the 
poet,  the  architect,  the  composer,  the  painter,  the 
sculptor,  the  inventor,  the  organizer  of  an  indus- 
try. It  may  be  the  ideal  of  the  discoverer,  who 
feels  that  every  onward  step  in  science  is  a  step 
upward  for  the  human  race. 

For  the  realization  of  any  one  of  these  ideals 
there  must  be  concentration  of  attention  and 
energy.  And  in  connection  with  this  concentra- 
tion, this  narrowing  and  deepening  of  the  stream 
of  vitality  toward  one  end,  there  springs  up  a 
feeling,  an  enthusiasm  which,  without  violence, 
we  may  call  the  worship  of  the  ideal.  Sometimes 
the  object  of  supreme  desire  takes  violent  posses- 
sion of  a  man.  His  imagination  is  captured  and 
held.  The  ideal  quickly  becomes  an  idee  fixe, 
an  obsession.  His  life  is  controlled  by  it,  and  all 
his  energies,  if  he  be  a  man  of  achievement,  find 
their  outlet  in  this  one  direction.  But  more 
often,  it  is  a  quiet,  natural  growth.  There  is  a 
gradual  building  up  from  the  dawning  of  the  first 
impression,  the  first  feeling  of  attraction,  to  the 


222  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

recognized  ideal.  And  before  this  domination  of 
one  desire  is  attained  there  is  often  the  growth 
and  decadence  of  many  lesser  ideals. 

The  episodic,  kaleidoscopic  ideals  of  youth 
chase  each  other  through  the  years  of  immaturity, 
each  one  surrounded  with  a  temporary  glamour, 
intense  while  it  lasts  and  apparently  imperishable, 
but,  fading  away  as  one  more  luminous  appears 
on  the  horizon.  Each  one  leaves  a  residuum  of 
feeling  and  experience,  a  compound  of  disillusion 
and  regret  and,  probably,  a  measurable  harden- 
ing of  the  susceptibilities  of  the  imagination.  As 
the  man  approaches  maturity  he  is  likely  to  exer- 
cise his  critical  faculties  more,  to  question  the 
seductiveness  of  this,  or  that,  appeal  for  his  devo- 
tion, to  ask,  Is  it  worth  while?  is  it  what  it  appears 
to  be?  will  it  fulfil  its  promises? 

If  it  stands  these  challenges  and  still  holds  the 
imagination,  its  attractiveness  increases.  Every 
time  the  man  turns  away  and  looks  oack  again 
there  is  a  stronger  light  upon  it.  It  acquires 
form  and  clearness  of  outline.  He  no  longer 
thinks  he  sees,  but,  he  sees  the  object  which  is 
above  all  other  things  desirable.  When  a  man 
reaches  this  stage  he  generally  experiences  a 
great  happiness.  For  the  chief  want  of  his  nature, 
an  end  to  live  for,  has  for  a  time  at  least  been  met. 
Even  though  the  realization  of  his  ideal  seems  at 
the  beginning  almost  hopelessly  out  of  his  reach, 
its  mere  existence,  as  a  well-defined  ideal,  gives 
him  a  glow  and  a  satisfaction  in  living  that  noth- 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  223 

ing  else  can  give.  He  has  a  wellspring  of  life 
and  joy  and  energy  within  him  such  as  the  man 
without  an  object  in  life  can  never  possess.  And 
as,  day  by  day,  he  fosters  it  and  moves  toward 
it,  by  innumerable  little  steps,  the  attractiveness 
and  the  joy  increase.  He  lives  and  he  knows  that 
he  lives.  His  heart  sings  within  him,  not  for 
what  he  has  as  yet  in  his  possession,  but  for  the 
movement,  the  progress  toward  ["that  which  is  to 
him  a  light  shining  brighter  and  brighter. 

Though  he  may  have  frequent  disappoint- 
ments and  discomfitures,  there  is  an  undercurrent 
of  satisfaction  because  he  is  in  love  with  some- 
thing, because  his  soul  has  found  an  outlet  through 
which  it  streams  forth  in  daily  worship.  And  by 
worship  and  effort  the  man  grows  in  strength  of 
will  and  in  power  of  achievement.  He  becomes  a 
perfected  instrument  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  end  to  which  he  has  devoted  his  unswerving 
attention  and  passionate  regard.  This  is  what 
makes  the  world  go  round,  not  simply  for  the 
individual,  but  also  for  the  great  social  and  in- 
dustrial organism  in  its  totality.  It  is  the  wor- 
ship of  the  ideal  that  fits  men  for  their  tasks, 
that  keeps  them  to  their  tasks  through  weariness 
and  self-denial,  through  watchings  and  fastings, 
through  years  of  ingratitude  and  neglect  and 
human  cruelty. 

Now,  does  not  all  this  point  to  the  belief  that 
the  future  of  evolution  will  have  for  its  motive 
power,  and  perhaps  essentially  consist  in,  some 


224  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

form  of  the  worship  of  the  ideal?  We  are  war- 
ranted, I  think,  by  the  facts  in  making  this 
assumption. 

II 

The  next  question  then  is,  what  are  the  ante- 
cedent probabilities  as  to  the  characteristics  of 
this  ideal?  The  experiences  to  which  we  have 
just  given  our  attention  indicate  clearly  what 
some  of  these  must  be.  We  have  seen  that  there 
is  an  unmistakable  gradation  of  ideals  on  a  scale 
of  value  and  efficiency.  The  essential  quality 
of  an  ideal  is  not  a  matter  that  can  be  referred 
only  to  the  taste  of  the  individual.  Unquestion- 
ably it  has  a  value  as  related  to  the  peculiarities 
of  the  individual  and  to  the  plane  of  evolution 
that  he  has  reached  at  any  given  time.  But  it 
has  also  a  distinct  place  on  a  scale  of  absolute 
values  applicable  to  the  human  race  as  a  whole. 
It  is  not,  in  this  connection,  necessary  or  desir- 
able to  try  to  make  a  list  of  all  the  qualities  that 
should  appear  on  such  a  scale.  But,  as  regards 
the  great  process,  there  are  certain  vital  charac- 
teristics which  we  must  postulate  as  necessary 
to  an  ideal  which  can  presume  to  be  that  of 
advancing  evolution. 

In  the  first  place  it  must  be  inexhaustible.  This 
one  quality  takes  it  out  of  the  class  of  lesser 
ideals  and  puts  it  into  a  class  by  itself.  Other 
ideals  are  finite;  this  one  must  be,  as  related  to 
our  powers  of  growth,  infinite.  These  others, 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  225 

that  is,  the  forms  in  which  they  embody  them- 
selves, can  be  compassed,  emptied  of  their  seduc- 
tions and  left  behind.  This  one,  the  supreme, 
can  never  be  compassed  nor  left  behind,  for  it 
is  the  ideal  of  ideals,  the  reality,  of  which  all  others 
are  only  the  scattered  rays.  It  is  the  source 
from  which  they  have  sprung  and  the  end  in 
which  alone  they  can  find  the  fulfilment  of  their 
prophecies.  It  must  be  inexhaustible,  not  sim- 
ply as  related  to  one  faculty,  one  department  of 
human  aspiration;  for  this  would  mean,  and  does 
continually  result  in,  abnormal  development,  be 
the  specialty  what  it  may.  It  must  have  such  a 
fulness  of  content,  such  a  potentiality  as  related 
to  all  the  activities  of  the  soul  that  each  one  shall 
find  its  progressive  satisfaction  and  realization 
in  it. 

An  ideal  so  related  to  the  human  mind  can  be 
nothing  other  than  mind  itself,  —  a  supreme 
mind  in  which  all  and  more  than  all  the  possi- 
bilities shadowed  forth  in  human  visions  of  per- 
fection are  not  only  existent,  but  always  active 
and,  like  the  great  process  itself,  ever  moving  on. 

If  now  we  postulate,  in  response  to  these  de- 
mands of  our  human  experience,  the  reality  of 
such  a  supreme  being,  are  we  thereby  abandoning 
the  region  of  fact  for  that  of  fancy?  Are  we 
trying  to  establish  as  an  actuality  that  for  which 
we  can  find  no  endorsement  in  past  experience? 
On  the  contrary,  we  are  simply  focalizing  atten- 
tion upon  one  great  class  of  facts  in  human  history, 

15 


226  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

outlining  the  conclusions  to  which  they  point 
and  offering  a  working  hypothesis  as  to  their 
place  in  the  human  scheme  of  things. 

If  this  most  important  and  significant  factor 
fits  into  the  place  we  have  assigned  it,  if  it  is  seen 
to  be  the  keystone  of  the  arch  of  human  thought 
and  experience,  providing  a  foundation  on  which 
we  may  securely  build  heavenwards,  it  cannot  be 
set  aside.  It  has  been  established  as  all  our  other 
well-founded  beliefs  are  established.  Our  approach 
to  it  has  been  tentative;  it  has  been  an  explora- 
tion along  the  line  of  a  special  class  of  facts  and 
a  search  for  their  complementary  factor,  some- 
what as  the  astronomer  searches  for  a  star  which 
ought  to  be  found  in  a  certain  place  in  the  heavens, 
or  as  a  chemist  describes  some  of  the  qualities  of 
an  element  not  yet  discovered,  from  the  require- 
ments of  classified  facts  in  his  possession.  And 
if,  at  this  point,  we  recall  our  vision  from  its 
speculative  task,  we  see  right  before  us,  as  an 
actuality,  that  which  we  have  postulated. 

The  supreme  ideal  that  we  have  described  as 
necessary  for  the  continued  evolution  of  man  is 
an  existing  thing  in  human  experience.  It  is 
and  has  been  through  the  ages  a  most  potent 
factor  in  the  evolution  of  the  human  mind.  It 
has  been  the  source  of  the  most  vital  inspiration, 
the  spring  of  desire,  of  effort,  and,  in  the  largest 
sense,  of  conduct.  It  has  all  the  characteristics 
of  our  ideal,  not  only  in  the  advanced  form  in 
which  it  exists  to-day,  but,  more  particularly 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  227 

and  essentially,  in  the  history  of  its  becoming. 
As  we  look  back  upon  that  history,  the  crude 
forms  in  which  it  existed  during  the  childhood 
of  the  race  may  seem  to  have  almost  nothing 
in  common  with  its  maturer  forms.  But  this  is 
not  peculiar  to  any  one  department  of  human 
ideas. 

The  world  of  our  conceptions  is  an  organized 
whole,  every  part  of  which  is  dependent  upon  the 
other  parts.  Each  different  one  has  in  turn  its 
day  of  expansion  and  growth,  while  others  may 
be  relatively  at  a  standstill;  and  at  such  times  it 
often  seems  to  those  who  are  specially  interested 
in  a  growing  department  that  these  others  have 
reached  the  limit  of  their  usefulness  and  should, 
as  encumbrances,  be  eliminated.  But  anon,  these 
overshadowed  departments  of  our  organized  belief 
come  to  their  own.  They,  in  their  turn,  are 
quickened  and  enter  upon  a  growth  of  transfor- 
mation and  adjustment,  fitting  them  to  their 
place  in  the  living  and  developing  whole. 

These  different  sources  of  our  human  thought 
cannot  perish,  or  wholly  disappear,  because  they 
are  of  the  very  essence  of  human  nature.  They 
spring  each  from  a  divine  germinal  instinct,  an 
irrepressible  principle  making  for  growth  and 
progressive  realization. 

The  God-consciousness  of  the  race  has  passed 
through  as  many  phases  as  the  race  itself.  In  its 
earlier  stages  of  development  it  does  not  appear 
as  an  ideal  at  all.  It  is  the  brooding  sense  of 


228  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

an  existence  higher  up  on  the  scale  of  being,  a 
personality  more  powerful  than  man;  not  one 
to  be,  in  any  true  sense,  worshipped,  but  rather 
one  to  be  feared  and  propitiated.  When,  at  a 
later  stage,  the  conviction  that  this  higher  per- 
sonality is  beneficent,  that  He  is  one  to  be  adored 
and  loved,  dawns,  it  is  confined  to  a  few  indi- 
viduals, the  men  of  deeper  insight  and  inspired 
imagination. 

These,  the  prophets,  declare  what  God  is  as 
revealed  in  their  experience.  They  speak  boldly 
with  a  "thus  saith  the  Lord"  because  they  speak 
from  experience  and  not  from  speculative  or 
reasoned  premises.  Their  words  find  a  response 
in  a  select  following,  who  recognize  the  voice  of 
God  speaking  strongly  and  authoritatively  through 
these  inspired  ones.  They  know  the  God  of 
the  prophets  as  the  Very  God  Who  has  already 
worked  in  them,  but  hitherto  only  vaguely  com- 
prehended and  timidly  desired.  Ages  ago  this 
thought  of  God  as  the  supreme  ideal  entered  into 
the  world,  ages  ago  it  was  proclaimed  in  no 
uncertain  words.  But,  history  all  the  way  down 
is  the  record  of  men's  unfitness  to  receive  it. 
Men  have  ever  seen  in  God  a  more  or  less  mag- 
nified reflection  of  those  in  power  among  them. 
The  arbitrariness  and  love  of  self-aggrandizement 
that  have  so  often  characterized  their  earthly 
rulers  have  been  transferred  to  "Him  who  sitteth 
in  the  Heavens. " 

The  ancient   Hebrew  liturgy,   as  we  have  it 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  229 

in  the  Psalms,  is  a  luminous  illustration  of  the 
coexistence  of  diverse  conceptions  of  God  in  the 
thoughts  of  a  nation  to  which  the  reality  of 
God  was  a  foregone  conclusion.  In  the  Psalms 
we  have  a  theology  in  the  process  of  evolution. 
Antagonistic  ideas  of  God  are  continually  linked 
together,  apparently  without  a  thought  that 
they  are  antagonistic.  Love  and  pitiful  mercy 
are  coupled  with  revengeful  cruelty.  Grandeur 
of  being,  majesty  of  bearing  in  the  works  of 
nature,  largeness  of  soul  to  the  uttermost  limit 
of  human  thought,  are  there,  and  at  the  same 
time  the  imputation  of  the  human  littleness  of 
a  soul  that  exults  in  satisfied  anger  and  physical 
triumph  over  enemies. 

The  ideal  is  taking  shape  through  much  tribu- 
lation, holding  its  own,  but  not  yet  triumphing 
over  the  crudities  of  a  lagging  development. 
The  higher  thought  stands  out  clear  and  full, 
with  a  grandeur  and  majesty,  a  depth  and  tender- 
ness of  expression  that  satisfy  the  most  exacting 
demands  of  the  soul,  an  expression  that  has 
furnished,  for  all  time,  the  most  exalted  form  of 
language  for  human  worship.  But,  it  is  not  till 
the  advent  of  that  messenger  of  God  who  embodied 
this  spirit  in  a  far  higher  degree,  that  we  have  the 
separation  and  exaltation  of  the  finer  conception 
and  the  unmistakable  condemnation  of  the  lower. 

"  Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been  said  by  them 
of  old  time,  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  and 
hate  thine  enemy.  But  I  say  unto  you,  love  your 


230  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

enemies,  bless  them  that  curse  you  .  .  .  that 
you  may  be  the  children  of  your  Father  which 
is  in  Heaven. " 

This  is  the  distinct  setting  up  of  an  ideal.  It  is, 
indeed,  but  one  aspect  of  that  ideal,  and  it  is 
expressed  in  language  that  seems  to  us  hyperbole. 
But  any  effort  to  indicate  the  ideal  in  words  must 
result  in  hyperbole,  because,  as  related  to  human 
aspiration  and  effort  it  is,  and  must  always  con- 
tinue to  be,  unattainable.  Were  it  otherwise, 
the  demands  of  evolution  would  not  be  met. 
"Be  ye  perfect  even  as  your  Heavenly  Father  is 
perfect"  is  the  necessary  expression  of  it.  A 
fuller  and  more  explicit  one  is  given  us  in  that 
wonderfully  condensed  formula  which  contains 
the  quintessence  of  the  old  Jewish  religion: 

"THOU  SHALT  LOVE  THE  LORD  THY  GOD  WITH 
ALL  THY  HEART  AND  WITH  ALL  THY  MIND  AND 
WITH  ALL  THY  STRENGTH,  AND  THOU  SHALT  LOVE 
THY  NEIGHBOUR  AS  THYSELF." 

An  appearance  of  impracticability  attaches  to 
both  these  formulas.  They  seem  too  high,  too 
separate  from  the  life  that  we  experimentally 
know,  to  be  heartily  and  honestly  appropriated 
as  achievable  ends  by  any  one.  They  appear  to 
involve  the  absolute  reversal  of  the  motive  prin- 
ciples of  life,  the  suppression  of  its  energizing 
factors.  Life,  as  we  know  it,  is  full  of  devotion 
to  passing  interests,  but  these  interests,  though 
ephemeral,  are  all  important  to  the  life  to  which 


THE  GREAT  IDEAL  231 

they  contribute.  To  eliminate  them  would  be 
like  removing  all  the  organs  through  which  the 
heart  serves  the  body,  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
it  freer  play. 

But,  this  transcendent  aspect  of  the  ideal  is 
really  no  practical  bar  to  its  acceptance,  for 
its  attachments  to  actuality  are  indicated  very 
clearly  in  the  context.  The  " Father  in  Heaven" 
Whom  we  are  exhorted  to  resemble  is  identified 
with  the  God  of  nature.  It  is  He  that  causeth 
His  sun  to  shine  on  the  evil  and  on  the  good  and 
His  rain  to  fall  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust. 
In  other  words,  we  are  referred  to  the  study  of 
God,  as  He  manifests  Himself  in  the  actual  world, 
for  an  explanation  of  details  and  for  the  practical 
adjustment  of  our  lives  to  them.  Isolated  from 
this  practical  setting,  the  great  two-sided  formula 
which  expresses,  at  the  same  time,  the  rule  and 
the  ideal  of  life,  seems  to  involve  an  insuperable 
contradiction. 

The  first  clause  of  it  is  expressed  in  uncom- 
promising absolute  terms  — ' '  with  all  thy  heart 
and  with  all  thy  mind  and  with  all  thy  strength." 
But,  the  second  clause  at  once  limits  and  explains. 
It  provides  for  and  commands  two  streams  of 
soul-energy  which  are  to  share  the  attention,  the 
devotion,  and  the  effort  of  the  same  soul  that  has 
been  directed  to  concentrate  everything  on  the 
thought  of  God.  And  these  two  streams  of 
soul-energy  are  just  those  which,  in  the  natural 
man,  have  worn  deep  channels:  the  love  of  self, 


232  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

which,  from  the  initial  moment  of  consciousness, 
has  been  the  moving  power  of  evolution;  and  the 
love  of  our  neighbour,  which  has  been  evolved 
and  fostered  and  extended,  from  its  beginnings 
in  the  ties  of  consanguinity,  all  through  the  course 
of  social  organization.  These  two  are  to  have 
their  full,  equal  share  of  the  vital  forces  generated 
in  every  living  soul  of  man. 

Men  have  not  lived  through  the  Christian 
centuries  under  this  formula  without  making  a 
workable  adjustment  of  its  apparently  divergent 
clauses  to  the  conduct  of  current  affairs.  But 
they  have,  generally  speaking,  been  able  to  live 
without  understanding  the  principles  of  such 
adjustments,  or  legitimizing  them  in  their  moral 
judgments.  The  impossible  ideal  set  up  by  the 
first  great  commandment  has  seemed  more  or 
less  the  censor  of  their  devotion  to  various  lesser 
ideals.  Necessary  though  this  latter  devotion  be, 
in  the  logic  of  events,  its  justification  will,  ever 
and  anon,  figure  in  the  court  of  conscience  as 
disloyalty  to  the  highest  ends  of  being. 

To  work  out,  from  the  standpoint  of  evolution, 
the  true  relation  of  the  absolute  ideal  to  the  host 
of  lesser  subsidiary  ideals  is  one  of  the  great 
practical  problems  of  a  living  theology. 


CHAPTER  XII 

TWO   FORMULAS 

WE  have  now  two  formulas  on  our  hands, 
both  of  which  are  said  to  be  radi- 
cally related  to  the  conduct  of  human 
life  and  equally  comprehensive  in  their  bearing. 
"Work  out  your  own  salvation,  it  is  God  that 
worketh  in  you."     "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 
thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbour  as 
thyself." 

I 

It  is  time  for  us  to  compare  or,  shall  we  say, 
contrast  these  two.  Are  they  compatible  with 
each  other?  Do  they  logically  hang  together? 
Can  they  practically  work  together?  At  first  sight 
it  might  seem  that  these  questions  must  be  an- 
swered in  the  negative.  Each  of  our  two  propo- 
sitions has  in  itself  a  paradoxical  look,  to  overcome 
which  we  have  fallen  back  upon  concrete  ex- 
perience. But  when  we  bring  the  two  together, 
for  co-operation,  the  paradoxical  and  practically 
conflicting  nature  of  the  attempt  looks  almost 
insurmountable. 

Are  any  two  principles  in  the  world  more 
definitely  opposed  to  each  other  than  altruism  and 

233 


234  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

egoism?  Does  not  our  first  formula  appeal  essen- 
tially to  the  egoistic  side  of  human  nature  and 
the  second  to  the  altruistic?  How  can  a  man 
make  the  working  out  of  his  own  salvation  the 
great  purpose  of  his  existence  and  at  the  same 
time  aim  consciously  at  an  all-absorbing  love  to 
God  as  the  end  that  must  dominate  all  others? 
Is  living  for  self  the  same  as  living  for  another? 
Can  one  have  at  the  same  time  two  supreme 
ends?  Let  us  look  carefully  at  this  fundamental 
question. 

One  certainly  cannot  have  two  such  ends  if  they 
are,  in  the  nature  of  things,  radically  opposed  to 
each  other.  But  if,  on  the  contrary,  the  two  ends 
are  antagonistic  only  in  appearance,  if  in  practice 
they  may  be  made  to  serve  each  other,  become 
complementary  to  each  other,  then  the  duality  dis- 
appears in  an  essential  unity.  Sometimes  one  and 
sometimes  the  other  of  these  two  interests,  figures 
as  the  supreme  end,  and  alternately,  as  the  means 
for  attaining  the  end.  In  the  evolution  of  the 
human  mind  we  are  familiar  with  such  a  trans- 
position of  means  and  ends.  An  activity  which 
in  its  initial  stage  is  entered  upon,  not  for  its 
own  sake,  but  because  it  is  believed  to  be  tribu- 
tary to  some  ulterior  end,  is,  in  its  later  stages, 
pursued  quite  for  its  own  sake. 

The  beginnings  of  chemistry  were  not  noble. 
They  were  not  the  outcome  of  a  desire  to  advance 
science,  but  for  the  more  homely,  workaday 
motive  of  producing  gold  by  a  secret  process. 


TWO   FORMULAS  235 

Nevertheless  chemistry,  so  cultivated,  did  advance 
science,  and,  as  the  field  of  its  activities  widened 
and  its  marvellous  richness  fired  the  imagina- 
tion of  its  votaries,  the  original  end  vanished  out 
of  sight.  Devotion  to  science  became  its  own 
justification. 

So  with  our  apparently  conflicting  formulas. 
Our  postulate  is  that  the  great  end  of  existence 
for  every  intelligent,  normal  man  is  to  work  out 
his  own  salvation,  —  to  so  regulate  his  life,  his 
thoughts,  and  his  affections  as  to  secure  for  him- 
self the  realization  of  the  highest  possibilities  of 
his  nature.  Then  comes  the  question  how  shall 
he  work;  by  what  methods?  What  principle 
has  he  to  guide  him?  Where  lies  the  road  by 
which  he  is  to  travel?  We  have  answered,  That 
which  he  seeks  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  cultiva- 
tion of  a  passion  for  something  so  exalted,  so 
inexhaustible  in  its  satisfactions,  that  it  will  con- 
tinually lead  him  on  to  higher  and  still  higher 
realizations  of  himself. 

This  brought  us  to  our  second  formula,  which 
figures  as  the  means  to  the  attainment  of  the 
above  end,  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  mind  and  with  all  thy  heart  and 
with  all  thy  strength."  This  is  the  relation  of 
the  two  formulas  at  the  outset;  that  is,  during 
the  initial  stages  of  the  higher  evolution.  But, 
as  the  process  goes  on,  if  love  to  God  actually 
develops  in  the  soul,  if  it  widens  and  deepens 
and  discloses  to  a  man's  consciousness  the  great- 


236  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

ness  of  its  satisfactions  and  possibilities,  it  pro- 
gressively moves  into  the  position  of  an  end 
pursued  for  itself  alone.  The  thought  of  working 
out  one's  own  salvation  is  swallowed  up  in  the  flood 
of  life  that  has  entered  every  desolate  place. 

This,  we  may  confidently  believe,  will  be  the 
fruitage.  But  at  first  our  lives  are  passed  mainly 
in  the  transitional  stage.  The  end,  never  to  be 
lost  sight  of,  is  for  every  man  the  working  out  of 
his  own  salvation.  This  is  the  course  of  nature. 
It  is  the  repetition,  on  the  highest  plane,  of  the 
process  which,  on  every  plane,  carries  us  from 
one  stage  to  another  of  an  ever-expanding  life. 
There  must  be,  first,  the  struggle  for  existence, 
then  the  struggle  for  the  improvement  of  existence; 
then,  as  the  outcome  of  this,  the  development  of 
interests  that  serve,  sometimes  as  ends;  and  some- 
times as  means  to  ends. 

As  to  the  morality  of  making  personal  salvation 
the  aim  of  a  life's  striving,  there  is  much  to  be 
said.  The  position  that  it  is  the  necessary  in- 
centive and  guide  to  a  higher  type  of  being  will 
be  challenged  by  some  and  repudiated,  with 
righteous  indignation,  by  others.  Is  not  this  the 
crude,  narrow  view  of  life  that  the  highest  morality 
has  discredited  as  a  disintegrating,  soul-withering 
idea?  Has  not  all  social  and  moral  progress  been 
characterized  by  a  growing  altruism? 

My  position  is,  that  however  truly  this  may 
represent  a  much-approved  phase  of  modern 
thought,  it  is  a  partial,  one-sided,  and  therefore 


TWO  FORMULAS  237 

injuriously  false  view  of  the  situation.  Living  for 
others  is  distinctly  not  the  object  set  before  us 
as  the  great  end  of  life  either  in  the  Christian 
formula  or  in  any  other  formula  save  that  of  a 
very  modern  philosophy.  It  certainly  is  not  in- 
culcated by  practical  experience.  The  chief  and 
overwhelmingly  important  object  of  every  living 
soul  is  to  work  out  as  fully  as  may  be  its  own 
destiny.  This  is  the  trust  that  has  been  specially 
committed  to  each  one.  It  is  the  work  for  which 
the  individual  is  responsible. 

God  Who  has  fashioned  us  and  knows  us 
through  and  through,  our  tendencies,  our  capa- 
bilities, our  susceptibilities,  does  not  make  Him- 
self responsible  for  our  salvation.  He  has  put 
that  responsibility  upon  us.  How  much  less  can 
we,  having  no  private  latchkey  to  our  neighbour's 
soul,  able  to  approach  him  only  from  the  outside, 
look  with  certainty  for  any  definite  results  from 
our  efforts  to  influence  him  in  the  working  out 
of  that  salvation  which  is  his  business?  Unques- 
tionably it  is  our  duty  and  our  privilege,  and  one 
of  the  prime  conditions  of  success  in  the  working 
out  of  our  own  highest  good,  that  we  work  for 
that  of  our  neighbour  also.  But,  so  far  as  direct 
results  are  concerned,  we  are  to  the  last  degree 
uncertain  of  the  outcome.  We  may,  indeed,  rest 
assured  that  our  labours  of  love  will  bear  some 
fruit,  though  it  may  not  be  of  that  particular 
kind  on  which  we  have  set  our  hearts. 

The   missionary   who    succumbs   to    a   deadly 


238  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

climate,  or  to  the  violence  of  savages,  before  he  has 
had  time  to  speak  a  word  has  failed  in  the  imme- 
diate object  of  his  life,  but  the  spirit  that  inspired 
him  and  those  who  sent  him  has  enriched  the 
world.  But,  even  if  there  were  no  such  residuum 
of  good  in  the  outside  world,  the  results  in  the 
hero's  own  soul  are  of  incalculable  value  for  him. 
He,  at  all  events,  has  been  working  out  his  own 
salvation  in  the  effort  to  help  work  out  that  of 
others. 

To  see  this  matter  rightly  we  must  objectify 
the  self  we  are  working  for.  This  soul,  which 
I  call  mine,  is  a  thing  specially  committed  to  my 
care.  It  is  a  thing  of  wonderful  possibilities  in 
the  direction  of  happiness  or  misery;  of  nobility, 
beauty,  harmony,  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  degrada- 
tion, deformity,  and  dreadful  discord  on  the  other. 
Can  I  present  it  to  its  Maker  with  its  higher 
qualities  developed  as  the  outcome  of  my  life,  or 
shall  I  have  to  appear  before  Him  hi  shame  and 
self-reproach  with  nothing  but  a  ruined  instru- 
ment in  my  hands?  As  an  object  to  live  for, 
nothing  can  be  more  inspiring  than  this.  It  calls 
into  play  the  planning,  creative,  artistic  faculty. 
It  generates  the  love  that  springs  up  and  grows 
with  the  growth  of  any  living  thing  that  realizes 
itself  under  our  fostering  care. 
.  Furthermore,  an  attempt  to  suppress  self- 
interest  as  a  prime  factor  in  moral  evolution  is 
nothing  less  than  undertaking  a  reform  against 
nature.  It  proposes  the  elimination  from  the 


TWO  FORMULAS  239 

great  process  of  that  principle  which  has  hitherto 
been  its  mainspring.  It  is  not  simply  an  im- 
possible undertaking,  it  is  a  vicious  one.  To  set 
up  altruism,  or  any  other  principle,  as  that  which 
ought  to  be,  as  contrasted  with  devotion  to  self- 
interest  as  a  something  which  ought  not  to  be,  is  a 
most  mischievous  and  morally  depressing  doctrine. 
Whatever  the  moral  philosopher  may  say,  the 
rejected  principle  of  action  will  continue,  by  force 
of  nature,  to  be  the  motive  principle  of  the  great 
volume  of  life,  and  to  teach  men  that  this  is  an 
unworthy,  immoral  principle  is  to  put  them  in 
the  position  of  moral  outlaws.  If  they  intellectu- 
ally legitimize  the  doctrine  of  the  altruist,  they 
live  in  a  perpetual  self-stultification,  habitually 
condemning  themselves  in  that  which  they  allow. 

Reasoning  thus  from  facts,  from  the  relations 
which  the  great  forces  of  human  evolution  have 
borne  to  each  other  in  the  past,  I  conclude  that  the 
frank,  whole-hearted,  courageous,  joyous  devotion 
of  oneself  to  the  working  out  of  his  own  highest 
destiny  is  the  grandest  occupation  for  the  soul  of 
every  human  being.  But  now,  let  us  observe, 
there  is  another  side  to  all  this.  Important  and 
irrepressible  as  is  the  principle  of  self-realization, 
it  does  not  stand  alone.  It  is  but  one  of  an 
organic  group  of  principles,  each  one  of  which  is 
equally  important  in  the  higher  evolution  and 
each  one  of  which  has  emerged  as  a  rudimentary 
instinct  in  the  natural  course  of  the  great  process. 

Working  by  itself,  without  restraint  from  its 


240  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

associates,  the  instinct  of  self-realization  runs 
sometimes  a  riotous  course  to  ruin,  sometimes 
an  apparently  upward  course  to  monomania  and 
bitter  frustration  of  its  life  object.  Pure  egoism 
is  a  form  of  insanity,  and  a  cultivated  egoism  is 
sure  to  turn  upon  the  subject  of  it.  It  is  a  well- 
attested  fact  of  history  that  absolute,  autocratic 
power  carries  with  it  the  implications  of  insanity. 
The  solitariness  of  the  situation  unseats  the 
reason.  Culture,  for  its  own  sake  alone,  brings 
up  at  the  same  goal, — ennui,  self-reproach,  hatred 
of  that  which  was  formerly  delighted  in,  blank 
despair  where  there  has  been  an  outlook  of  ever- 
inereasing  happiness,  the  nakedness  of  poverty 
where  there  has  seemed  to  be  an  inexhaustible 
store  of  wealth. 

Tennyson,  in  the  " Palace  of  Art,"  has  given 
us  a  lurid,  but  perhaps  not  too  lurid,  picture  of  the 
tragedy  of  a  soul  that,  with  all  the  resources  of 
the  modern  world  at  its  command  and  endowed 
with  all  the  capabilities  of  a  highly  strung  organ- 
ization, has  sought  self-realization  with  nothing 
other  than  self  in  view. 

Lest  she  should  fail  and  perish  utterly 

God,  before  whom  ever  lie  bare 
The  abysmal  deeps  of  personality, 

Plagued  her  with  sore  despair. 

All  the  high  susceptibility  of  feeling,  the  keen- 
ness of  perception,  the  nobler  tastes  and  spiritual 
necessities  engendered  in  this  soul  that  has  been 


TWO  FORMULAS  241 

weaned  from  lower  gratification  to  the  highest 
that  art  and  culture  can  give,  join  together  to 
reproach,  and  torture  its  loneliness. 

And  death  and -life  she  hated  equally 
And  nothing  saw  for  her  despair, 

But  dreadful  time,  dreadful  eternity, 
No  comfort  anywhere. 

More  apparent  still  is  the  evil  and  cruelty  of 
this  instinct,  unrestrained,  when  we  turn  to  its 
manifestations  in  the  world  of  social  relations. 
However  fine,  however  impersonal  the  original 
conception  of  achievement  may  be,  the  realiza- 
tion of  it  in  a  militant  world  has  a  fatal  tendency 
to  debase  it.  What  was,  at  the  outset,  a  legit- 
imate passion  for  self-improvement  and  self- 
expression  gets  transformed  into  a  craving  for 
recognition.  The  desire  to  be  is  supplanted  by 
the  desire  to  appear,  the  desire  of  dominating 
the  imaginations  of  others,  of  commanding  their 
praises.  And  out  of  this  desire  is  developed  that 
brood  of  unlovely  and  hateful  things,  jealousy, 
envy,  cruelty.  Many  of  the  greatest  evils  of 
society  owe  their  origin  and  their  violence  to  the 
warring  of  rival  contestants  for  self-realization. 
In  any  given  age,  the  fashion  of  the  world  fixes 
the  attention  of  many  on  the  same  prizes,  and  in 
all  ages,  the  desire  for  wealth  and  power  is  a 
dominating  passion  of  dominating  souls.  This 
means  war.  In  the  realm  of  finance,  of  politics, 
of  social  prestige,  passions  and  cruelties  are 
16 


242  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

engendered  that  are  sometimes  as  essentially 
"hell"  as  that  which  declares  itself  on  the  battle- 
fields that  are  strewn  with  human  bodies. 

What  then  are  the  motives  that  shall  prove 
strong  enough  to  curb  and  transform  into  an 
angel  of  light  this  masterful,  tyrannical  instinct? 
We  have  said  that,  in  its  normality,  this  instinct 
is  but  one  of  an  organic  group  of  principles,  each 
one  of  which  is  equally  important  in  the  higher 
evolution  and  each  one  of  which  has  emerged  as 
a  rudimentary  instinct  in  the  natural  course  of 
the  great  process.  We  might  go  far  afield  to 
marshal  these  principles,  for  they  manifest  them- 
selves in  a  variety  of  forms.  But  it  is  more  to 
our  purpose  to  devote  attention  strictly  to  the 
condensed  statement  of  them  given  in  our  second 
formula.  And  the  more  we  study  that  formula 
in  relation  to  the  realities  of  life  and  to  the 
processes  of  becoming  in  human  evolution,  the 
more,  I  believe,  we  shall  be  impressed  with  its 
all-comprehensive  grasp  of  the  truth. 

In  the  prosecution  of  this  study  it  is  desirable 
that  we  dissociate  it  as  much  as  possible  from  its 
traditional  implications  of  divine  authority.  This 
is  not  to  separate  it  in  thought  from  its  connection 
with  the  inspired  Teacher  Who  set  the  sealof  His 
greatness  upon  it.  We  must,  indeed,  compare  it 
with  His  other  teachings  to  know  what  He  meant 
by  His  endorsement  of  it.  But  when  we  have 
ascertained,  so  far  as  may  be,  what  it  meant  to 
Him,  it  remains  for  us  to  make  it  ours  by  testing 


TWO  FORMULAS  243 

it  thoroughly  as  related  to  life's  experiences.  Does 
it  fit  in  with  the  past  of  human  thought  and 
feeling?  Is  it  capable  of  meeting  satisfactorily 
the  demands  which  the  crying  deficiencies  of  our 
incompleteness  make  upon  it?  Does  it  give  us  a 
true  answer  to  the  great  questions  which  we  are 
asking  of  evolution?  Does  it  indicate  the  one 
and  only  line  of  normal  development?  Does  it 
mark  out  clearly  an  end  worthy  of  the  life-effort 
and  enthusiasm  of  every  human  soul? 

II 

"  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all 
thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  soul  and  with  all  thy 
mind  —  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself." 
This  is  said  to  be  two  laws,  and  it  is  ordinarily 
thought  of  as  such.  But,  as  we  have  elsewhere 
pointed  out,  it  is  practically  a  threefold  formula. 
And  its  second  clause,  prescribing,  as  it  does,  two 
streams  of  soul-energy  that  are  diverse  and  often 
antagonistic  to  each  other,  obliges  us  to  divide  our 
attention  to  the  study  of  each  one  separately. 

The  love  of  our  neighbour  is  to  be  one  of  the 
great  ends  of  life.  The  love  of  self  is  another,  of 
equal  importance  with  the  first;  and,  because  it 
is  the  first  in  the  order  of  development,  we  must 
make  it  the  starting-point  of  our  investigation. 
It  is  here  that  we  have  the  strongest  attach- 
ments in  reality.  And  because  it  is  a  principle 
of  action  fully  mobilized  and  in  actual  possession 
of  the  situation  at  the  outset,  it  is  made  the 


244  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

gauge  of  that  other  principle  that  ought  to  be 
its  peer.  That  which  we  know  and  practise  is 
to  be  the  measure  of  that  which  is  as  yet  only 
partially  known  and  practised:  its  measure  not 
simply  as  to  the  volume  of  the  attention  and  life- 
energy  we  bestow  upon  it,  but  also  as  regards  its 
quality. 

The  standard  of  self-interest  is,  in  every 
normal  soul,  continually  changing.  If  we  are  in 
the  true  line  of  promotion  we  are  progressively 
aiming  at  higher  and  more  comprehensive  ends, 
and  the  love  of  our  neighbour  must  follow  suit. 
Not  that  we  are  to  presume  that  we  and  our 
neighbour  will  be  always  moving  at  the  same 
pace,  but  that  our  increased  apprehension  of  the 
possibilities  and  of  the  value  of  life  will  react 
upon  the  love  of  our  neighbour,  enlarging  and 
carrying  it  to  a  higher  degree  of  intensity. 

This  throws  us  back  once  more  on  the  recogni- 
tion of  the  fact  that  the  progressive  realization  of 
self  is  a  vital  factor  in  the  true  life.  That  this 
was  Our  Lord's  understanding  of  the  second 
clause  of  our  formula  will  be  clearly  seen  by  a 
comparison  of  the  development  of  its  two  outlooks 
in  His  illustrative  discourses.  His  parables  give 
us  truth  in  a  concrete  objective  form  which  there 
is  no  mistaking.  And  in  the  twenty-fifth  chapter 
of  St.  Matthew  we  have  both  sides  of  this  moral 
equation  so  illustrated.  Probably  no  two  repre- 
sentations of  the  outcome  of  human  life  and  of 
the  standards  by  which  its  success,  or  failure,  is 


TWO  FORMULAS  245 

to  be  measured  have  more  deeply  impressed  them- 
selves upon  men's  imaginations,  or  more  effectually 
influenced  their  lives,  than  that  of  the  parable  of 
the  Talents,  on  the  one  hand,  and  that  of  the  Final 
Judgment  on  the  other. 

Both  these  representations  have  to  do  with  the 
results  of  life  as  a  whole,  and  each  one  is  put 
before  us  as  if  it  constituted  the  sole  test  by  which 
individual  lives  are  to  be  judged.  At  the  same 
time  they  are  as  diverse  in  their  outlooks  as  they 
can  well  be,  one  having  regard  to  what  we  have 
called  self-realization,  the  other  setting  up  human 
sympathy  and  helpfulness  as  if  it  were  the  sole 
test  of  a  normal  life.  This  latter  has  regard  to 
the  love  of  one's  neighbour,  the  former  has  regard 
to  the  love  of  oneself. 

The  parable  of  the  Talents  carries  us  into  life's 
conflicts,  the  battle-fields  where  men  are  wrestling 
for  the  mastery  and  where  one  man's  gain  fre- 
quently involves  another's  loss,  and  it  seems  not 
only  to  legitimize  the  struggle,  but  to  make  its 
prosecution  the  test  of  a  faithful  life.  I  say  it 
seems  so  to  do.  And  even  where  we  rise  above 
the  literalness  of  the  figure,  we  are  still  held  to 
the  interpretation  that  the  development  and  in- 
crease of  man's  natural  endowments  are  the  great 
end  of  life.  For  the  working  out  of  his  own 
salvation,  in  other  words,  every  man  must  pri- 
marily aim  at  making  the  most  of  himself. 

The  allegory  of  the  Final  Judgment,  on  the 
other  hand,  makes  everything  hinge  on  the  extent 


246  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

to  which  men  have  given  heed  to  and  cultivated 
the  natural  promptings  of  sympathy.  Their  pity- 
ing love  has  gone  out  to  the  unfortunate,  to  the 
hungry,  to  the  captive,  to  the  sick.  What  an  ab- 
solutely different  career  from  that  outlined  hi  the 
narrative  of  the  servant  who,  entering  into  life's 
conflicts,  made  his  five  talents  into  ten!  The 
conscious  aim  in  the  one  case  is  helpfulness  to 
others,  the  conscious  aim  in  the  other  is  the 
realization  of  oneself.  It  is  unnecessary  to  point 
out  that  these  two  representations  were  not 
regarded  by  their  Author  as  the  contradiction  of 
each  other.  We  have  only  to  refer  back  to  His 
formula,  "love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself,"  or, 
what  is  equally  important,  "love  thyself  as  thy 
neighbour,"  to  recognize  the  fact  that  these  were 
to  Him  the  two  faces  of  a  composite  reality,  an 
organic  truth  which  we  are  to  work  out  into  a 
concrete,  objective  experience. 

Turning  now  from  the  teachings  of  Jesus  to  the 
teachings  of  nature,  we  find  the  fullest  endorse- 
ment of  the  equality  of  these  two  principles. 
Altruism,  the  love  of  our  neighbour,  is,  generally 
speaking,  the  softer,  the  less  established,  and,  as 
a  rule,  the  weaker  when  the  two  clash.  It  there- 
fore demands  more  of  our  attention  than  the  other. 
It  must  be  protected  from  the  encroachments  of 
selfism.  We  have  to  think  for  it,  plan  for  it,  foster 
and  nourish  it.  But  it  is  equally  important  that 
we  do  not  let  the  cultivation  of  the  one  obstruct 
the  full  and  vigorous  action  of  the  other.  It  is 


TWO  FORMULAS  247 

the  office  of  the  later  in  development  to  modify 
and  to  elevate,  not  to  weaken,  the  earlier. 

Now  let  us  take  a  look  at  this  word  equality, 
which  we  have  used  to  characterize  the  relations 
in  which  the  two  principles  stand  to  each  other. 
We  have  seen  in  another  connection  how  fatally 
easy  it  is  to  confuse  ourselves  by  using  conceptions 
generated  in  one  realm  of  thought  for  the  explica- 
tion of  relations  generated  in  a  totally  different 
one. 

If  we  permit  the  word  equality,  in  this  con- 
nection, to  bring  before  us  ideas  of  mechanical 
force,  or  even  of  degrees  of  authority,  prestige, 
and  the  like,  we  can  reduce  this  claim  to  an 
absurdity.  It  becomes  a  mere  matter  of  words 
quite  out  of  connection  with  the  world  of  facts. 
Experience  shows  these  two  principles  associated 
indeed,  but  not  as  yet  perfectly  adjusted  to  each 
other.  Their  limits  of  jurisdiction  are  not  defi- 
nitely marked  out.  They  are,  now  and  again, 
meeting  face  to  face  on  narrow  roads,  where  one 
or  the  other  is  obliged  to  give  way,  and  which 
of  the  two  yield  must  be  decided  by  the  circum- 
stances of  each  particular  case.  The  best  life 
is  a  matter  of  adjustments,  of  yielding  here,  of 
insisting  there,  in  deference  to  the  good  of  the 
personality  and  of  society  as  a  whole.  In  other 
words,  the  only  equality  between  altruism  and 
selfism  is  that  which  pertains  to  the  parts  of  an 
organism. 

From  a  more  comprehensive  point  of  view  they 


248  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

are  seen  to  be  not  antagonistic,  but  mutually 
supporting  factors  in  a  living  unity.  Each  sustains 
and  promotes  the  growth  and  health  of  the  other; 
they  also  limit,  control,  restrain  each  other.  They 
are  to  each  other  what  the  heart  in  a  human  body 
is  as  related  to  the  organs  of  digestion,  or  what  the 
nervous  system  is  as  related  to  these  and  to  the 
muscular  system.  The  welfare  of  the  whole  and 
of  each  one  is  determined  by  the  normal  balance 
which  is  maintained  by  their  collective  action. 

We  are  familiar  with  the  antagonisms  that 
develop  themselves  in  our  physical  members. 
The  unity  of  the  body  is,  as  we  know,  made  up  of 
many  departments  of  operation  and  government 
in  which  there  is  great  diversity,  —  the  muscular 
system,  the  nutritive  system,  the  generative 
system,  that  which  governs  the  circulation  of  the 
blood,  and  that  which  regulates  our  breathing,  — 
and  each  one  of  these  has  its  own  special  centre 
in  the  nervous  system,  which,  apparently  from 
some  higher  centre,  co-ordinates  and  administers 
the  whole  as  a  balanced  organism. 

This  wonderful  complex  of  organs  and  activities 
comes  to  us  with  all  its  parts  so  perfectly  adjusted 
to  each  other  that,  under  normal  conditions,  we 
know  nothing  of  its  working.  Each  department 
performs  its  functions  silently  and  rhythmically. 
We  are  like  passengers  on  a  perfectly  appointed 
steamer,  blissfully  ignorant  of  machinery  and 
navigation,  and  with  but  little  understanding  of 
the  dangers  that  beset  us. 


TWO   FORMULAS  249 

But  there  is  no  rigidity  about  this  apparently 
perfect  order.  On  the  contrary  it  is  characterized 
by  great  elasticity  and  variability  of  adaptation. 
It  is  like  a  musical  instrument  that  can  be  played 
upon  with  results  ranging  from  discord  and  vul- 
garity to  the  most  sublime  reaches  of  emotion 
and  thought.  At  a  very  early  stage  of  our  experi- 
ence we  discover  that  the  natural  and  seemingly 
perfect  adjustments,  that  have  come  to  us,  have 
to  be  modified,  and  further,  that  some  of  these 
modifications  are  strenuously  resisted  by  the  old 
order.  Antagonisms  are  developed.  The  nervous 
system,  through  which  the  demands  of  the  govern- 
ing ego  are  made,  finds  difficulty  with  its  subordi- 
nates. Extra  and  unusual  labour  is  laid  upon 
them,  and  restraints,  under  which  they  chafe. 
The  distinctly  animal  departments  clamour,  more 
or  less  insistently,  for  liberty  of  action;  and  the 
result  is  sometimes  a  devastating  insurrection. 

Out  of  such  experiences,  many  times  repeated, 
there  grows  up  a  definite  and  persistent  recog- 
nition of  a  duality  of  interests  in  our  physical 
constitutions;  and  the  governing  personality  is  im- 
portuned to  encourage  the  one  or  the  other,  to  the 
discomfiture  of  its  rival.  The  libertine  sides  with 
one  faction  in  the  development  of  his  animal 
nature;  the  ascetic  with  the  other,  in  the  hope  of 
developing  his  higher  impulses  by  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  lower.  The  result  in  both  cases  is 
abnormal  and,  if  persisted  in,  ruinous.  Experi- 
ence discloses  to  us  a  law  written  in  our  members. 


250  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

Thou  shalt  regard  and  honour  and  normally 
develop  all  the  departments  of  that  wonderfully 
organized  human  body  that  thou  hast  inherited. 
Thou  canst  not  destroy  nor  degrade  one  part, 
without  prejudice  to  the  whole.  That  whole, 
with  all  its  parts,  is  the  outcome  of  an  intelli- 
gence higher  and  deeper  and  broader  than  thine. 
Study  and  take  counsel  of  it. 

The  antagonisms  that  have  been  developed  are 
very  real,  they  cannot  be  ignored.  But  if  we 
magnify  these  to  the  obscuring  of  the  unity  of 
the  interests  to  which  all  are  tributary,  we  are 
mistaking  a  side  issue  for  the  central  and  vital 
truth.  It  is  not  otherwise  when  we  are  confronted 
with  the  claims  of  selfism  and  altruism.  When 
these  latter  are  urged  upon  us  from  the  standpoint 
of  an  external  "thou  shalt,"  the  dominating  aspect 
of  the  situation  is  that  of  antagonism,  and  we 
may  be  inclined  to  look  upon  altruism  as  an  upstart 
principle  of  action  that  has  hitherto  been  asso- 
ciated with  self-government  in  a  purely  subordi- 
nate position;  that  has  existed  in  its  household, 
as  it  were,  on  sufferance,  without  authority, 
without  determining  influence,  the  companion 
and  solace  of  our  gentler  moods,  but  one  never 
allowed  to  interfere  with  matters  of  moment. 

Where  battles  have  had  to  be  fought  —  and  life 
has  been  a  series  of  battles  —  love  to  one's  neigh- 
bour has  been  left  at  home.  Life  is  a  stern  busi- 
ness; altruism  is  weak-hearted:  success  means 
triumph  over  opposition;  altruism  is  concession 


TWO  FORMULAS  251 

and  surrender.  Each  is  the  contradiction  of  the 
other;  to  try  to  establish  them  as  equals  in  self- 
government  is  suicidal.  The  vital  forces  that  have 
hitherto  been  directed  successfully  against  foreign 
enemies  are  now  to  be  occupied  in  domestic  war- 
fare. The  new  principle  neutralizes  every  effort 
of  the  old.  Progress  is  brought  to  a  standstill, 
and  the  man  who  tries  to  live  by  such  a  for- 
mula is  like  one  struggling  in  a  quicksand.  Every 
movement  makes  his  situation  more  hopeless. 

This  is,  as  I  have  said,  the  view  of  the  case  that 
haunts  us  when  we  think  of  our  formula  as  a 
mandate  from  an  external  source,  ordering  us  to 
revolutionize  all  our  experience  of  life's  possi- 
bilities. But,  it  is  as  far  removed  from  the  correct 
view  as  an  attack  of  hysterical  alarm  is  from  a 
judicial  opinion.  It  is  our  inveterate  habit  to 
measure,  at  the  outset,  new  principles  of  action, 
or  the  readjustment  of  old  principles,  by  conjuring 
up  visions  of  their  extreme  application.  The  con- 
servative instinct  of  self-protection  scents  danger, 
and  presents  the  case  wholly  in  the  light  of  its 
difficulties,  ignoring  the  fact  that  all  progressive 
change  involves  difficulties  and  the  overcoming 
of  them. 

The  antagonism  between  the  two  principles  is 
nothing  like  that  presented  to  our  imaginations; 
nor  is  the  affirmed  subordination  of  altruism  cor- 
rectly stated.  Altruism  is  a  basic  principle  of 
life,  and  one  which  far  down  in  the  tribes  below 
man  has  exerted  a  determining  and  momentous 


252  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

influence.  The  fact  that  it  has  been  quieter,  less 
obtrusive,  and  more  restricted  in  its  influence 
is  not  to  the  purpose.  The  influence  has  been 
there,  deep  set  in  human  nature,  and  powerful.  It 
has  been  the  theme  of  poetry  and  art,  the  moving 
principle  of  the  noblest  heroics  in  every  age,  and 
under  modern  conditions  it  is  the  source  of  all  our 
higher  enthusiasms. 

Under  civilization  it  has  become  organized  and 
conventionalized,  run,  as  it  were,  into  moulds. 
And  through  this  conventionalizing  it  has  been 
transformed.  It  has  taken  on  the  appearance  of 
a  modified  self-interest.  The  whole  social  order 
is  a  complex  of  adjustment  by  means  of  which 
we  serve  our  neighbour  in  serving  ourselves.  It  is 
next  to  impossible  for  us  to  engage  in  any  health- 
ful activity,  beneficial  to  ourselves,  that  is  not  in 
some  way  helpful  to  others.  And  all  this  organiza- 
tion of  interests  has  been  gradually  built  up  by 
man's  ingenuity,  advancing  under  the  guidance 
of  a  higher  intelligence.  Like  the  human  body, 
it  moves,  for  the  most  part,  on  its  accustomed 
ways  without  attracting  our  attention.  We  have 
been  born  into  it,  we  are  formed  and  fitted  to  it. 
Our  duties  and  our  privileges  lie,  for  the  most 
part,  within  its  sphere.  We  can  serve  our  neigh- 
bour more  effectually,  and  in  the  long  run  more 
acceptably,  by  working  through  the  order  of  its 
adjustments  than  in  any  other  way. 

But,  as  in  the  case  of  the  physical  organism, 
there  is  no  rigidity  about  this  order.  It  gives 


TWO  FORMULAS  253 

play  to  great  freedom  of  choice  for  those  who 
occupy  positions  of  more  or  less  power,  and  for 
all,  as  regards  the  spirit  in  which  life  is  lived  under 
it.  Like  the  human  body,  its  provisions  can  be 
distorted  from  their  normal  functioning,  they  can 
be  prostituted  to  base  uses,  made  to  serve  the 
ends  of  personal  greed  and  cruelty,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  they  can  be  raised  to  a  higher  efficiency 
and  more  harmonious  action.  Though  so  intri- 
cate and  highly  organized,  the  social  order  into 
which  we  are  born  is,  in  no  wise,  a  completed  one. 
It  works,  but  it  works  lamely.  We  accomplish 
great  things  by  its  instrumentality,  but  the  vision 
of  a  better,  more  universally  beneficent  order, 
engenders  a  wholesome  dissatisfaction  with  that 
which  has  been  hitherto  achieved. 

Yet  we  must  provisionally  accept  that  which  is, 
and  make  the  best  of  it.  Unless  we  go  into  seclu- 
sion we  must  become  accomplices  in  much  that 
we  deplore.  The  acceptance  of  the  latter  alterna- 
tive is  the  lesser  of  two  evils;  for  if  good  men 
isolate  themselves  from  the  heat  and  conflict  of 
the  world  because  of  the  wickedness  of  its  organ- 
ized working,  the  world  is  not  thereby  made 
better.  The  only  possibility  of  improvement  is 
through  the  energizing  of  the  good  element,  the 
increase  of  the  volume  of  honourable,  determined, 
intense  living  on  the  part  of  those  who  love  that 
which  is  right  and  true.  The  character  of  a 
civilization  or  a  community  is  expressed  neither 
by  its  laws  nor  by  its  proclamations,  but  by  the 


254  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

use  or  abuse,  on  the  part  of  its  members,  of  the 
liberty  that  its  legal  system  permits. 

Every  man  who  forms  plans,  or  pursues  ends, 
under  such  a  system,  does  something  to  give 
tone  and  character  to  it.  If  he  plan  and  work  in 
harmony  with  its  spirit,  keeping  always  in  his 
heart  the  principles  of  fair  dealing,  restraining 
himself  where  the  law  does  not  coerce  him,  he 
helps  to  make  the  social  order  that  which  the 
laws  of  the  land  aim  at  in  their  provisions.  But 
if,  on  the  other  hand,  he  scheme  and  plot  to 
make  the  laws  which  protect  his  interests  the 
instruments  for  invading  the  interests  of  others, 
diverting  into  private  channels  the  forces  intended 
to  secure  the  good  of  all,  he  is  helping  to  make  the 
social  order  an  organized  power  for  oppression 
and  robbery.  To  work  worthily  and  uprightly 
within  the  established  order  must  therefore,  it 
seems  to  me,  be  the  first  aim  of  one  who  submits 
himself  to  our  formula. 

The  second  flows  as  a  corollary  from  the  first. 
Because  the  social  order  is  an  agency  of  such  vital 
importance,  and  because  the  creation  and  elabora- 
tion of  it  has  been,  and  must  be,  largely  the  work 
of  man,  every  intelligent  member  of  society  is 
constrained,  by  the  love  of  his  neighbour,  to 
keep  himself  vitally  and  helpfully,  if  may  be,  in 
sympathy  with  efforts  toward  its  improvement. 
It  is  a  foregone  conclusion  that  many  of  these 
will  prove  to  be  failures.  In  the  social  as  well  as 
in  the  individual  life  we  live  and  prosper  by  making 


TWO  FORMULAS  255 

experiments.  They  are  often  costly,  and  it  must 
be  our  study,  by  circumscribing  their  area,  to 
make  them  as  little  so  as  possible.  But  to  ignore 
the  imperfections  of  our  social  system,  to  main- 
tain an  attitude  of  indifference  toward  the  hard- 
ships that  its  working  involves,  is  not  consistent 
with  love  to  one's  neighbour. 

And  again,  outside  the  framework  of  the  estab- 
lished order,  there  has  sprung  up  an  extensive 
and  important  environment,  that  of  voluntary, 
philanthropic  endeavour.  Whatever  may  be  said 
in  disparagement  of  our  modern  civilization,  the 
existence  of  this  organized  love  to  one's  neighbour 
is  a  standing  and  ever-increasing  evidence  of  the 
vitality  of  the  principle  of  which  it  is  the  outcome. 
However  numerous  the  mistakes  and  however 
serious  the  blunders  that  may  have  characterized 
its  development,  the  spirit  that  animates  it  is  of 
incalculable  value,  and  no  soul  of  man  that  works 
sympathetically  with  it  can  fail  of  a  rich  reward. 

Again,  auxiliary  to  these  organized  forms  is  the 
immediate,  personal  service  that  we  may,  in  a 
variety  of  ways,  be  able  to  render  to  those  who 
have  been  worsted  in  life's  battles.  All  kinds  of 
relief  or  rescue  work  are,  as  related  to  the  great 
volume  of  organized  life,  side  issues;  but,  as  related 
to  the  individual,  they  are  matters  of  prime  im- 
portance. They  are  a  supplementary  work,  an 
attempted  mitigation  of  the  evils  of  the  social 
mechanism,  the  binding  up  of  wounds  incurred  in 
its  battles,  caring  for  the  victims  with  which  its 


256  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

way  is  strewn.  But  they  are  of  prime  importance 
to  the  individual  because,  without  some  participa- 
tion in  them,  the  best  part  of  one's  own  soul  is 
in  danger  of  becoming  atrophied. 

I  think  we  may  assume  these  considerations  to 
be  sufficient  to  establish  the  position  that  love  to 
one's  neighbour  is  organically  the  correlative  of 
love  to  oneself;  that,  for  the  highest  results,  the 
two  must  work  together,  mutually  inspiring,  sus- 
taining, restraining  each  other.  But  how  to  bring 
about  the  harmony  of  working  necessary  for  such 
results  is  the  question. 

The  principle  that  represents  self  is  strongly 
entrenched  in  the  habit  of  generations.  It  is  an 
aggressive,  dominating  force  that  in  the  course  of 
nature  overrides  all  obstacles.  The  principle  that 
stands  for  love  to  one's  neighbour,  though  a  well- 
defined  and,  under  favorable  conditions,  a  power- 
ful instinct,  has  not  in  itself  the  strength  to  hold 
its  own  when  brought  into  conflict  with  its  rival. 
The  social  organism  moreover,  though  in  many 
ways  helpful  and  indispensable,  is,  at  the  same 
time,  the  source  of  the  most  intense  rivalries  and 
antagonisms.  It  brings  men  together,  makes 
them  helpful  and  necessary  to  each  other,  and  at 
the  same  time  sets  them  in  such  opposition  as 
to  engender  deep-seated  hatred.  From  the  same 
source  flow  kindly  relations  and  diabolical  pas- 
sions. 

Civilization,  while  it  articulates  and  unifies 
human  life,  at  the  same  time  differentiates  and 


TWO  FORMULAS  257 

separates.  Classes  become  estranged  from  each 
other.  The  sweet  natural  sympathy  of  a  common 
life  becomes  soured  and,  like  a  poison  in  the  blood, 
engenders  disease  in  the  place  of  health.  Organ- 
ically related  and  indispensable  to  each  other  as 
altruism  and  selfism  are,  therefore,  we  cannot  look 
to  them  to  work  out  by  themselves  the  problem 
of  their  normal  adjustment. 

This  is  just  where  the  major  clause  of  the 
Christian  formula  justifies  itself.  It  is  the  key- 
stone of  the  arch  that  binds  together  and  makes 
mutually  supporting  tendencies,  otherwise  antag- 
onistic. It  is  a  mandate  not  from  an  external 
source,  but  one  that  is  rooted  in  our  constitutions. 
It  is  elemental  in  human  nature  because  that 
nature  shares  the  divine.  It  is  a  command  of  the 
great  intelligence  and  love  that  far  transcends 
humanity,  and  yet  dwells  in  every  human  soul. 
It  is  the  voice  of  our  better  selves  and,  at  the 
same  time,  the  voice  of  God.  There  is  no  unnat- 
uralness  about  it  other  than  the  unnaturalness 
that  may  be  predicated  of  every  higher  principle 
that  has  emerged  in  the  process  of  evolution.  It 
involves  no  antagonism  to  the  principle  of  love 
to  oneself  and  one's  neighbour  except  that  which 
characterizes  the  complementary  forces  of  an  or- 
ganism. It  is  the  outcome  of  an  instinct  without 
which  human  life  would  be  but  a  lame,  inconse- 
quent, abortive  episode,  but  with  the  recognition 
of  which,  vistas  deep  and  wide  disclose  possi- 
bilities of  infinite  meaning  and  value. 
17 


258  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

Immediately  we  focalize  life  from  the  standpoint 
of  this  principle,  all  its  parts  undergo  a  radical 
transformation.  Nothing  remains  the  same  be- 
cause everything,  as  related  to  this  principle,  has 
taken  on  a  higher  significance.  The  most  ordinary 
tasks  of  life  are  glorified  by  it.  The  most  hope- 
less antagonisms  are  reconciled  in  it.  In  its 
light  the  love  of  one's  neighbour,  coincidently 
with  the  love  of  oneself,  are  seen  to  be  converging 
lines  pointing  to  a  perfect  reconciliation.  As  re- 
lated to  the  love  of  God  they  are  seen  to  be  one. 
They  attain  to  an  absolute  union  and  solidarity 
in  the  Being  from  Whom  both  have  sprung.  If, 
assuming  tentatively  the  position  of  one  in  whom 
love  to  God  has  become  a  supreme,  controlling 
principle,  we  may  imagine  ourselves  to  have 
achieved  the  state  of  existence  which  this  point 
of  view  reveals,  the  problem  is  seen  to  be  solved. 
The  world,  the  great  process,  is  no  longer  a  riddle. 
We  have,  at  least,  conceived  an  end  worthy  of  all 
the  ages. 

This,  it  may  be  said,  is  building  castles  in  the 
air.  But,  every  attempt  to  look  into  the  future, 
to  provisionally  construct  that-which-is-to-be,  for 
the  guidance  of  our  conduct,  is  of  the  nature  of 
castle  building.  The  important  question  is,  Do 
we  build  wisely?  Is  that  which  we  conceive  as 
desirable  likely  to  be  realized  as  the  actual? 


CHAPTER  XIII 

EXPERIENCE    AND    WILL 

WE  have  outlined  a  theory  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  God,  and  have  claimed  validity 
for  it  on  the  ground  that  it  has  been 
thoroughly  tested  and  amply  verified  in  experience. 
But  it  may  fairly  be  asked:  in  whose  experience? 
Before  venturing  a  direct  answer  to  this  question, 
let  us  glance  for  a  moment  at  the  analogous  case 
of  science,  of  that  which  we  provisionally  call 
established  science.  By  whose  experiences  and 
judgments  have  the  conclusions  of  science  been 
established?  Not  by  that  of  all  men,  nor  by  that 
of  the  generality  of  men,  but  by  that  of  a  small 
group,  or  groups,  of  men  who  have  addressed  them- 
selves with  absorbing  devotion  to  working  out, 
in  different  departments,  the  problems  of  science. 
To  the  conclusions  reached  by  the  concurrent 
judgment  of  these  experts  the  rest  of  the  world 
defers;  that  is  to  say,  the  intelligent  part  of  it. 
It  is  content  to  accept  and,  more  or  less,  to  live 
by  these  conclusions.  Not  that  they  are  accepted 
as  final;  the  assent  given  to  them  is  always  provi- 
sional. The  scientific  deliverances  of  to-day  may 
not  be,  in  all  respects,  those  of  to-morrow.  Neither 

259 


260  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

are  these  conclusions  accepted  in  all  their  details. 
The  body  of  science  which  we  may  reasonably 
regard  as  established,  fringes  off  in  every  direction 
into  hypotheses,  surmises,  guesses,  and  prophesies 
which  win  the  interest,  or  approval,  of  individuals, 
in  various  degrees. 

Do  we  feel  any  less  confidence  in  the  conclusions 
of  science  because  they  do  not  appeal  to  us  as 
finalities?  On  the  contrary,  although  we  may  not 
be  in  a  position  to  question  the  validity  of  the 
agreements  of  the  men  of  science,  our  common- 
sense  distrusts  them  most  when  they  take  on  the 
tone  of  finality  and  absoluteness,  when  they  tell  us 
that,  in  this,  or  that,  direction,  they  have  touched 
bottom,  that  there  are  no  realities  unfathomable  by 
their  methods,  and  that  all  reality  must  conform 
to  the  physical  laws  which  they  have  formulated. 
We  feel  the  greatest  confidence  in  them  when 
we  know  that  they  recognize  their  limitations. 

More  than  this,  it  is  true  that  the  characteristics 
of  openness,  incompleteness,  progressiveness,  con- 
stitute the  greatest  value  of  science  to  human 
thought.  The  scientific  spirit  is  of  more  vital 
importance  than  the  whole  body  of  scientific 
achievement.  The  conviction  that  the  world  of 
man  is  growing,  daily  expanding  and  deepening, 
revealing  new  vistas  for  exploration,  new  possi- 
bilities of  realization  —  this  is  the  secret,  the 
motive  power  that  generates  the  energy  and  the 
enthusiasm  of  all  modernism.  It  is  this  that 
gives  zest  to  life  even  in  the  midst  of  weariness, 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  261 

that  makes  the  future  glow  with  expectancy 
though  the  present  be  discouraging. 

The  criticisms  so  often  aimed  at  the  materialism 
of  the  modern  world  and  the  comparisons  made 
between  it  and  times  of  less  progressive  thought- 
fulness,  to  the  disparagement  of  the  former,  have 
no  truth  in  them  except  as  related  to  surface 
manifestations.  Those  more  conservative  ages 
of  reflection  had  their  charm  to  those  who  lived 
in  them;  their  outlooks  upon  life,  though  limited, 
were  often  very  beautiful,  and  they  have  a  much 
enhanced  charm  for  us  who  look  back  to  them 
from  the  hurry  and  changefulness  of  our  day, 
but,  as  compared  with  the  present,  those  ages 
were  only  half  alive. 

Now  let  us  turn  back  to  the  question  of  re- 
ligious experience.  Of  whose  experience  were  we 
speaking  when  we  were  advocating  its  use  as  the 
foundation  of  religious  belief?  Essentially  and 
potentially  of  the  experience  of  every  normal 
individual  of  the  human  race.  Primarily  and 
actually  of  the  experience  of  the  religiously 
advanced  members  of  it.  It  is  the  experience  of 
those  who  have,  as  in  science,  addressed  them- 
selves with  absorbing  devotion  to  working  out  the 
problems  of  religion.  Let  me  call  attention  to 
the  difference,  wide  as  eternity,  between  this 
kind  of  foundation  and  that  offered  by  a  church 
claiming  divine  authority.  Up  to  a  certain  point, 
as  Cardinal  Newman  has  shown,  the  analogy 
between  the  authoritative  Church  of  Rome  and 


262  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

the  body  of  men  eminent  in  science  holds,  and 
the  argument  that,  as  we  defer  to  the  conclusions 
reached  by  the  concurrent  judgment  of  scientific 
experts,  so  we  ought  to  defer  to  the  deliverances 
of  the  Church,  seems  valid.  As  we  accept  results, 
the  reasons  for  which  we  cannot  understand,  from 
the  one,  so  ought  we  to  accept  them  from  the 
other. 

There  could  not  be  a  greater  fallacy.  We  have 
already  noted  that  the  assent  given  to  the  de- 
liverances of  scientific  men  is  of  a  radically  differ- 
ent kind  from  that  demanded  by  the  authority 
of  the  Church.  It  is  only  a  provisional,  tentative 
assent  that  is  asked  for,  or  given,  to  the  conclusions 
of  science.  It  is  an  absolute,  final  assent  involv- 
ing the  suppression  of  all  individual  criticism 
that  is  demanded  by  the  Church.  But  this  only 
scratches  the  surface  of  the  difference.  Under- 
neath the  kind  of  assent  asked  for,  lies  the  method 
by  which  the  beliefs  to  which  adhesion  is  asked 
have  been  reached.  That  of  the  Church  com- 
mands our  acceptance  on  the  ground  that  its 
doctrines  emanate  from  a  source  altogether 
distinct  from  that  to  which  we  must  trace  the 
common-sense  wisdom  by  which  we  live.  It  is, 
in  fact,  the  reverse  of  the  method  which  obtains 
in  ordinary,  practical  affairs.  In  the  one  case  the 
beliefs  have  been  communicated  directly,  in  all 
their  completeness  and  absoluteness,  from  an 
infallible,  authoritative  source;  in  the  other  they 
have  been  worked  out,  laboured  for,  reached, 


EXPERIENCE   AND    WILL  263 

after  much  travail  of  research  and  experiment, 
and  as  the  outcome  of  many  failures. 

The  one  is  claimed  to  be  divine  wisdom  miracu- 
lously imparted,  the  truth  of  an  omniscient,  all- 
wise  mind,  that  must  take  precedence  over  every 
other  kind  of  truth,  superseding  and  extinguishing 
it,  if  not  agreeable  to  it.  The  other  is  human 
wisdom,  wisdom  in  the  making,  incomplete,  inade- 
quate, imperfect,  looking  ever  to  the  future  for 
its  enlargement  and  correction. 

The  inductive  theology,  which  we  advocate, 
abolishes  altogether  this  antagonism,  this  theory 
of  two  sources  of  wisdom,  two  methods  of  ac- 
quiring it.  It  finds  but  one  kind  of  wisdom 
emanating  from  one  source;  that  is,  the  co- 
operative working  of  the  human  and  the  divine. 
The  practical  wisdom  of  everyday  life,  the  scien- 
tific wisdom  of  those  who  have  devoted  themselves 
to  the  discovery  of  nature's  secrets,  the  religious 
wisdom  of  those  who  have  given  themselves  to  the 
study  of  life's  higher  problems  —  all  these  are  on 
the  same  footing  as  regards  source  and  method, 
and  each,  in  its  own  sphere,  has  a  like  claim  to  our 
allegiance.  Each  of  them  has  a  divine  element, 
each  has  a  human  element.  Each  one,  in  its  own 
way,  is  a  revelation  of  God  and  also  a  revelation 
of  man  and,  all  taken  together,  they  illustrate 
how  God  is  related  to  man  and  what  dispositions 
man  should  cultivate  toward  God. 

With  such  an  understanding  we  have  the  same 
foundation  for  a  free-working  theology  that  we 


264  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

have  for  a  free-working  science,  and  we  have  the 
same  reason  to  anticipate  the  building  up  of  a 
body  of  stable  belief  hi  the  one  department  as 
in  the  other.  With  such  a  theology  there  is  no 
foundation  whatever  for  the  assumption  that, 
hi  the  absence  of  an  authoritative  church,  all 
religion  must  tend  to  pure  individualism  and 
disintegration.  There  is  no  such  necessity  in  the 
nature  of  things.  In  religion,  as  in  other  things, 
"wisdom  is  justified  of  her  children. "  There  will 
always  be  dissent  and  cavilling,  because  there  is 
always  a  multitude  of  people  about  us  who  know 
not  their  right  hand  from  their  left  in  these  matters. 
But  there  will  also  be  a  strong,  vigorous,  growing 
body  of  belief  for  the  guidance  and  encourage- 
ment of  the  seekers  after  God.  Nor  need  we 
confine  ourselves  to  the  future  tense  in  speaking 
of  these  things. 

The  future  is  more  exhilarating  with  its  promise 
of  better  things  to  come,  but  it  is  permitted  to 
speak  also  of  the  present  and  find  in  it  abun- 
dant assurance.  The  process  of  theological  and 
religious  transformation  in  the  midst  of  which  we 
live  necessarily  involves  the  tearing  down  of  much 
that  was  held  sacred  in  other  days;  and  destruction 
on  a  large  scale  always  arrests  and  holds  the  atten- 
tion of  the  multitude  far  more  than  the  opposite 
process  of  building  up.  The  former  is  effected 
rapidly,  it  is  spectacular,  startling,  and,  if  brought 
about  in  the  way  of  warfare,  with  varying  episodes 
of  rally  and  retreat,  it  adds  to  its  tragic  interest 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  265 

that  of  partisanship.  The  process  of  reconstruction, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  slow,  tentative,  for  the  most 
part,  attracting  little  attention;  it  is  accompanied 
by  failures  and  temporary  set-backs,  and  often 
discredited  by  work  that  has  to  be  done  over  again. 
But  spite  of  all  hindrances  the  re-formation 
of  doctrine  is  well  on  the  way  to  general  recogni- 
tion. While  attention  has  been  held  spellbound 
by  the  destruction  wrought  in  the  old  structures, 
it  has  been  quietly  maturing  strength.  It  has 
not  been  the  work  of  conventions  nor  of  councils. 
It  has  been  sparingly  recognized  in  high  places; 
nor  will  it  ever  have  the  stamp  of  finality  and 
infallibility.  It  has  been  elaborated,  in  travail 
of  soul,  by  individuals  and  communities.  It  has 
been  the  natural  growth  of  the  human  spirit 
bursting  the  fetters  by  which  it  has  been  bound  > 
for  centuries,  slowly  and  painfully  becoming  / 
aware  of  the  vital  forces  pulsating  within  it  and 
awakening  to  the  consciousness  of  the  glorious 
possibilities  of  a  new-found  liberty.  And  nothing 
is  farther  from  the  truth  than  the  frequently  made 
charge  that  all  this  new  constructive  effort  is 
divergent.  It  presents  us,  indeed,  with  a  variety 
of  aspects,  it  is  accompanied  by  erratic  move- 
ments; but  it  is  also  characterized  by  an  under- 
lying unity  of  principle  and  motive.  This,  its 
positive  side,  is  the  only  one  worth  attention; 
the  other  aspects  are  of  passing  significance,  the 
chips  that  fly  from  the  hewing  of  grand  building 
material. 


266  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

We  may  say  of  our  modern  civilization  that  it 
goes  on  wheels.  But  all  wheels  are  not  the  same 
kind  of  wheels.  There  are  the  wheels  of  ox-carts 
and  the  wheels  of  baby-wagons,  wheels  of  motor- 
cars that  rush  us  over  the  earth's  surface,  and 
wheels  in  our  pockets  that  mark  the  time  they 
take  to  do  it  in,  great  driving-wheels  that  run 
the  complex  machinery  of  a  factory  and  smaller 
wheels  that  are  moved  by  it.  But,  with  all 
this  multiplicity  of  wheels,  differing  from  each 
other,  there  is  one  wheel-principle.  Each  kind 
does  its  own  work  in  its  own  way,  but  in  every 
case  it  is  the  work  of  a  wheel,  whether  it  be  that 
of  a  locomotive  or  that  of  a  pulley. 

So  it  is  with  the  great  elemental  truths  of  reli- 
gion. They  admit  of  many  forms  of  statement  and 
of  application,  —  varying  and  progressive  adjust- 
ments; but  in  every  case  this  variety  emanates 
from  a  unity  that  admits  of  the  most  categorical 
authoritative  statement.  There  is  no  uncertainty 
about  this,  there  is  no  possibility  of  evasion.  It 
is  absolute  in  its  finality.  It  represents  necessity. 
It  is  the  one  and  only  principle  leading  to  pro- 
gressive well-being.  "This  do,  and  thou  shalt 
live." 

Thus,  the  great  Christian  formula  is  expressed 
in  the  terms  of  an  uncompromising  mandate, 
Thou  shall.  It  is  the  law.  Not  simply  the 
Jewish  law,  nor  its  digest,  but  the  essential  all- 
comprehensive  law  of  our  being.  And  when  it 
is  complied  with,  when  it  is  converted  from  the 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  267 

general  into  the  particular,  realized  in  the  actual 
experience  of  the  individual,  it  transforms  all 
those  differences  of  view,  which  from  the  outside 
look  so  divergent,  into  varying  expressions  of  an 
essential  oneness  of  spirit,  —  into  that  most  effi- 
cient kind  of  unity  that  is  grounded  in  identity  of 
desire,  of  aspiration,  of  enthusiasm. 

But  it  is  just  here  that  many  find  an  in- 
superable difficulty.  The  way  of  life  is  seen  to 
be  not  only  narrow  and  difficult,  but  its  gate 
locked  and  bolted  against  the  generality  of  men. 
Can  love,  it  is  asked,  be  called  into  being  by  the 
will?  Does  not  love  cease  to  be  love  if  it  is  not 
spontaneous?  To  many  the  thought  of  an 
achieved  love  is  a  profanation  of  sacred  things. 

There  has  certainly  been  much  in  our  educa- 
tion to  foster  such  a  sentiment.  Because  love  is 
so  beautiful,  so  life-giving,  so  transforming  and 
sustaining  in  its  influences,  we  have  abstracted  it, 
personified  and  idealized  it.  It  is  a  mysterious 
something,  outside  and  superior  to  us,  that  comes 
unbidden  and  takes  possession  of  us,  a  something 
sacred  that  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  control  nor 
oppose.  In  poetry,  in  romantic  stories,  in  the 
drama,  this  view  of  love  has  been  continually  set 
before  us,  and  to  a  certain  extent  we  have  hon- 
oured it;  but  in  practical  life  we,  for  the  most 
part,  protest  against  it.  It  is  not  all  a  lie.  But 
in  its  unqualified  form  it  is  a  most  pernicious, 
and  demoralizing  lie. 

It  is  a  strange  delusion  that  love,  the  most 


268  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

precious,  the  most  powerful,  the  great  saving 
agency  of  the  world,  is  one  over  which  we  have 
no  control.  Not  that,  in  this  respect,  it  consti- 
tutes a  category  by  itself.  Faith,  which  is  the 
condition  of  it,  has  shared  its  segregation.  When 
our  late  leader  in  psychology  gave  us,  a  few  years 
ago,  an  essay  entitled,  "The  Will  to  Believe," 
there  was  a  great  outcry  on  the  part  of  many. 
The  idea  that  a  man's  beliefs  can  be,  and  ought 
to  be,  regulated,  to  a  great  extent,  by  his  will 
was  denounced  as  immoral.  Such  a  view,  it 
was  affirmed,  carried  within  it  the  seeds  of  insin- 
cerity and  constructive  hypocrisy. 

Now,  is  there  to  be  found  in  experience  any 
good  reason  for  isolating  these  two,  faith  and  love, 
from  all  the  other  activities  of  the  soul?  We  are 
not  slow  to  recognize  the  part  which  our  wills 
play  as  regards  these  others.  The  very  founda- 
tion of  our  conception  of  ourselves  as  responsible 
beings  rests  upon  the  recognition  of  the  fact  that 
we,  to  a  great  degree,  make  ourselves  what  we  are, 
that  we  are  free  to  cultivate  habits  that  collectively 
constitute  character.  To  live  aright,  to  work 
wisely  for  our  own  salvation,  is  to  give  the 
strength  of  our  lives  to  the  formation  of  habits. 
The  highest  possibilities  of  being,  toward  the 
realization  of  which  we  press,  are  habits. 

We  cultivate  the  habit  of  courage,  not  only 
because  it  is  necessary  for  success  in  life's  conflicts, 
but,  because  without  it  no  man  can  feel  himself  to 
be  a  man.  We  cultivate  fear  also,  lest  courage 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  269 

should  degenerate  into  rashness.  We  cultivate 
enthusiasm  because,  in  its  absence,  we  find  no 
joy  in  the  tasks  we  have  set  for  ourselves.  We 
cultivate  patience  because  enthusiasm,  by  itself, 
overshoots  the  mark,  tends  to  aggressiveness  and 
intolerance,  becomes  transformed  into  bitterness 
and  discouragement.  We  cultivate  sensitiveness 
in  order  that  we  may  understand  the  finer  meanings 
of  life.  We  cultivate  indifference  to  defend  our- 
selves not  only  against  its  coarser  solicitations, 
but  also  its  false  and  foolish  refinements.  We 
cultivate  the  social  spirit  that  we  may  not  be 
estranged  from  our  feliowmen.  We  cultivate  the 
power  of  living  a  life  apart  from  society  lest  all 
our  energy  should  run  to  waste  hi  its  trivi- 
alities. We  cultivate  generosity  and  we  culti- 
vate thrift.  We  cultivate  industry,  endurance, 
forbearance.  We  cultivate,  in  the  largest  sense, 
wisdom. 

When  we  come  to  the  formation  of  specific 
aptitudes,  it  is  the  same.  We  become  proficients 
in  no  branch  of  art  or  science,  experts  in  no  pro- 
fession except  by  intelligently  directed  will  power, 
-  by  cultivation,  training,  discipline.  We  begin 
with  nothing,  or  next  to  nothing,  —  a  little  mother- 
wit,  a  predilection  or  hint  of  fitness  for  this  or  that 
pursuit;  the  rest  is  done  by  faithful  attention 
and  effort,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned,  and  by  the 
creative  spirit  of  God  working  with  us  in  response 
to  our  prayers  of  endeavour. 

Now,  while  we  recognize  this  as  the  order  of 


270  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

becoming,  in  all  that  makes  for  self-realization  in 
life's  utilities,  must  we  settle  down  to  the  con- 
viction that  the  most  efficient,  most  dominating 
qualities  of  the  soul  belong  to  a  sphere  that  is 
outside  our  influence?  —  that  we  have  no  control 
over  those  master-powers  by  means  of  which, 
alone,  all  the  other  more  or  less  conflicting  aims 
of  life  can  be  co-ordinated,  organized,  and  made  to 
work  for  one  great  end?  If  so,  let  us  count  human 
life  a  progressive  futility,  and  man  a  moral 
invertebrate. 

If  we  have  not  the  power  to  shape  our  convic- 
tions, if  we  cannot,  by  the  exercise  of  the  will, 
determine  and  temper  them  for  action,  then  the 
increase  of  intelligence  makes  us  increasingly 
helpless.  The  more  we  know,  the  worse  off  we  are. 
For  the  extension  of  knowledge  continually  opens 
new  aspects  of  things.  With  a  small  amount  of 
knowledge  it  was  possible  for  us  to  come  to  definite 
conclusions  and  give  ourselves  with  whole-hearted- 
ness  to  acting  upon  them.  But,  with  the  ability 
to  look  on  the  other  side  of  this,  that,  and  the 
other  question,  come  the  divided  mind,  hesitation, 
inaction,  and  a  growing  paralysis  of  the  executive 
faculty.  Every  man  of  affairs  knows  this  well 
enough,  and  owes  all  his  successes  to  acting  upon 
it.  It  is  a  commonplace  of  experience  that  a  man 
who  cannot  make  up  his  mind  arrives  nowhere. 
And  it  is  quite  as  necessary  that  minds  be  made  up 
in  the  realm  of  spiritual  beliefs  as  in  that  of  secular 
affairs. 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  271 

It  is  not  a  matter  of  suppressing  our  honest 
convictions  in  the  one  case  any  more  than  in  the 
other.  It  is  our  duty  to  receive  and  weigh  all  the 
evidence  and  all  the  inducements  that  present 
themselves,  and  if,  when  all  has  been  said  and 
done,  the  two  sides  seem  to  be  evenly  balanced, 
we  have  to  decide  by  sheer  force  of  will,  and  fight 
it  out  on  that  line. 

As  matter  of  fact,  this  evenness  of  balance  is 
a  hypothetical  rather  than  an  actual  situation 
except  as  regards  unimportant  issues,  those  in 
which  one  way  is  just  about  as  good  as  another. 
In  problems  of  greater  moment,  when  we  have 
been  hopelessly  befogged  in  our  efforts  to  solve 
them  on  their  own  merits,  there  are  usually 
larger  considerations  that  help  to  clear  the 
atmosphere.  The  appeal  to  these  is  like  that 
to  a  higher  court,  and  it  is  just  here  that  our 
method  can  be  applied  most  effectively.  The 
issues  brought  before  this  higher  court  relate  to 
the  practical  effects  of  a  decision  upon  the  individ- 
ual and  upon  society.  Of  two  antagonistic  pro- 
positions, does  the  adoption  of  one  promise  better 
results  in  actual  life  than  the  other?  Does  the 
one  give  courage  and  strength  to  men  in  the  midst 
of  life's  warfare?  Does  the  other  tend  to  apathy 
and  demoralization? 

The  problems  of  theology  are  specially  in  point 
here.  Take,  for  instance,  those  two  that  stand 
at  the  head  of  the  list.  Is  there  a  benevolent  God 
working  with  man  in  the  affairs  of  the  world? 


272  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

May  the  career  of  the  individual  life  be  continued 
after  the  dissolution  of  the  body?  A  formidable 
array  of  arguments  may  be  brought  for  a  negative 
answer  to  both  of  these  questions,  some  of  them 
grounded  in  actual  experience.  Equally  weighty 
considerations  may  be  urged  for  an  affirmative 
answer.  And  looking,  now  on  this  side  and  now 
on  that,  it  may  seem  that  no  decision  is  possible. 
Shall  we  then  rest  the  case  here  and  content  our- 
selves with  the  ineptitude  of  Agnosticism?  Or, 
recognizing  that  no  answer  to  these  great  questions 
is  practically  a  negative  answer,  shall  we  set  our- 
selves to  determine  what  resultants  are  likely  to 
flow  from  a  negative  and  what  from  a  positive 
answer?  If  we  adopt  this  latter  course  we  make 
an  appeal  from  logic  to  life. 

We  seek  enlightenment  as  to  the  good  and  the 
bad,  the  true  and  the  false  in  spiritual  beliefs 
from  the  same  instructors  that  have  taught  us 
and  our  ancestors  to  distinguish  between  foods 
and  poisons,  between  normal  tissue  and  gangrene, 
between  the  air  that  gives  life  and  vigour  when 
we  breathe  it  and  that  which  depresses  and  cor- 
rupts the  system.  We  have  learned  what  kind  of 
convictions  it  is  well  to  encourage  and  what  to 
eradicate,  as  a  farmer  knows,  through  his  own  and 
inherited  experience,  the  difference  between  re- 
munerative crops  and  weeds,  the  difference  be- 
tween soil  that  will  yield  him  nothing  and  that 
which  will  respond  to  the  labour  he  bestows  upon 
it.  As,  in  the  one  set  of  relations,  experience  has 


EXPERIENCE    AND    WILL  273 

guided  us  to  a  wise  selection  of  means  for  the 
promotion  of  physical  well-being,  so  in  the  other 
set  of  relations,  experience  must  be  trusted  to 
guide  us  to  a  reliable  choice  of  the  beliefs  that  will 
sustain  and  advance  our  spiritual  welfare. 

If,  as  regards  the  two  great  questions  above 
noted,  it  appears  that  an  affirmative  answer  works 
for  the  encouragement  of  all  that  is  good  in  life, 
if  it  makes  men  strong,  earnest,  self-controlled,  if  it 
meets  the  great  desideratum  by  giving  something 
that  is  in  every  way  worth  living  for,  if  it  is  an 
answer  that,  in  its  comprehensiveness,  takes  up  all 
other  beliefs  and  ends,  co-ordinates,  unifies,  com- 
bines them  all  in  organic  efficiency,  if  its  employ- 
ment receives  the  endorsement  of  those  vital 
impulses  that  we  instinctively  recognize  as  the 
noblest  and  most  authoritative,  giving  us  the  un- 
reasoned conviction  that  we  are  moving  in  the 
right  direction;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  a  nega- 
tive answer  brings  no  helpfulness  in  its  train,  no 
outlook  into  a  future  of  spiritual  realization  to 
nerve  us  for  the  conflicts  of  the  present,  no  lighting 
up  of  the  great  world-process,  nothing  to  hope  for 
beyond  the  disappointing  things  of  our  mundane 
life,  nothing  to  be  loyal  to,  nothing  of  that  joy 
that  comes  from  the  consciousness  of  movement 
toward  something  better,  the  divine  sense  of 
expectation,  that  makes  present  trials  and  sacri- 
fices seem  light,  if,  in  our  own  experience  and  in  the 
lives  of  others,  its  fruits  are  in  the  long  run  indif- 
ference, apathy,  cynicism  —  then,  the  will  must 
18 


274  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

decide  for  the  affirmative  and  see  that  its  judg- 
ment is  made  effectual. 

It  is  the  contention  of  our  method  that  such 
an  appeal  is  legitimate,  and  not  only  so,  but  that 
the  decisions  thus  reached  are  things  not  to  be 
laid  on  the  shelf  for  academic  use,  but  things  to 
live  by.  They  are  of  momentous  importance. 
Having  reached  this  point,  a  mere  formal  assent 
is  criminal  neglect  of  duty  and  opportunity.  We 
are  bound  to  give  the  whole  strength  of  our 
adhesion  and  the  whole  volume  of  our  loyalty 
to  them.  We  must  become  partisans  and  in 
dead  earnest,  for  these  are  matters  of  spiritual 
life  and  death. 

The  will  must  take  control  of  the  situation  and 
rule  with  a  masterful  sway.  It  can  do  this, 
through  its  two  strong  arms  of  attention  and 
inhibition.  A  man's  responsibility  centres  very 
much  in  the  use  which  he  makes  of  these  two 
faculties.  Their  strength  varies  in  different  in- 
dividuals all  the  way  from  zero  to  almost  absolute 
sway.  They  are  the  muscles  of  the  soul,  that 
may  be  trained  to  moral  athleticism  by  judicious 
use,  or  relaxed  and  devitalized  by  neglect.  Happy 
is  he  who,  when  the  critical  moment  for  action  has 
arrived,  has  a  well-trained  will  at  his  command. 

The  time  for  discussion  has  passed.  There  is  to 
be  no  more  looking  on  this  side  and  on  that.  There 
is,  henceforth,  but  one  set  of  arguments  to  be 
considered.  As  regards  these  two  vital  questions, 
everything  that  is  affirmative  is  to  have  its  full 


EXPERIENCE   AND    WILL  275 

and  unqualified  weight.  The  will  converts  intelli- 
gence, for  its  uses,  into  a  bull's-eye  lantern,  con- 
centrating all  its  rays  upon  the  truths  that  its 
authority  has  established;  and  it  brings  to  bear 
upon  any  hostile  considerations  that  would  force 
themselves  into  the  light,  its  grand  and  saving 
power  of  inhibition,  —  the  power  that  pounces 
upon  unlawful  intruders  and  pitches  them  out, 
neck  and  heels.  At  this  stage  the  only  sane 
answer  to  all  negation  is,  "Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan." 

Not  that  we  have  reached  a  point  beyond  which 
there  is  no  further  growth.  We  have  only  just 
begun.  Both  these  beliefs,  —  the  affirmation  of 
God  and  of  the  future  life,  —  are  living  roots  that 
must  be  cultivated;  they  have  within  them  the 
potency  of  eternal  life,  there  is  no  limit  to  their 
growth,  nor  to  the  variety  of  the  fruits  they  may 
be  made  to  produce  in  different  lives.  But,  in  all 
soils  they  must  be  nourished  and  protected  by 
the  will  that  has  planted  them.  And  here  let  us 
make  sure  that  we  apprehend  clearly  another 
aspect  of  the  situation  which,  while  it  belongs 
altogether  to  the  sphere  of  modern  thought,  is  at 
the  same  time  vital. 

All  the  deductions  from  experience  that  we  have 
just  reviewed,  as  conducive  to  spiritual  well-being, 
have  to  do  with  purely  human  relations.  They 
are,  in  other  words,  adjustments  to  specific  re- 
quirements of  the  human  organism.  Granting, 
therefore,  all  that  has  been  said  of  their  trust- 


276  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

worthiness  and  practical  helpfulness,  how  are 
we  justified  in  advancing  from  this  position  to 
the  assumption  that  these  same  relations  are  a 
guide  to  any  reality  that  is  outside  and  independent 
of  them? 

I  answer  that,  in  evolution,  the  revelation  of  all 

*  reality  as  one  great  world-process  moving  toward 

|   constructions  of  higher  and  still  higher  values,  we 

have  a  most  instructive  and  sufficient  warrant  for 

the  assumption  that,  when  we  have  discovered  that 

which  makes  for  its  furtherance  in  the  line  of 

highest  achievement,  we  have  grasped  something 

which  we  may  safely  hold  to  be  an  independent 

reality. 

In  the  earlier  stages  of  our  argument  we 
were  constrained  to  regard  man  as  the  latest, 
most  highly  evolved  factor  in  the  great  drama  of 
progressive  organization;  and  we  were  able,  still 
further,  to  narrow  the  issue  by  fixing  upon  certain 
phases  of  human  development  as  constituting  the 
vital  principle  of  its  future.  When,  therefore, 
we  have  determined  the  conditions  that  conduce 
to  the  prosperity,  the  growth,  and  the  health  of 
those  qualities  of  humanity  that  are  not  only  the 
highest  on  the  scale,  but  which  explain,  co-ordi- 
nate, and  govern  all  the  others,  the  whole  great 
process  of  the  ages  flows  in  an  irresistible  volume 
to  turn  the  wheels  of  our  argument.  In  determin- 
ing the  status  of  the  one  factor,  man,  we  have 
laid  bare  the  secret  of  secrets,  the  reality  and  the 
meaning  of  the  world. 


EXPERIENCE   AND   WILL  277 

But,  we  must  return  to  the  consideration  of  the 
first  and  great  commandment,  "Thou  shall  love." 
All  that  has  been  said,  as  to  the  functions  of  the 
will  in  the  establishment  and  mobilization  of 
faith,  applies  equally  to  love.  But,  we  cannot  rest 
the  matter  there.  Love  is  a  far  more  illusive  word 
than  faith.  For,  while  it  connotes  the  highest 
activities  of  the  soul,  it  also  stands  for  some  which 
are  near  the  other  end  of  the  scale.  A  more 
extended  and  discreet  study,  therefore,  of  the 
relations  of  will-power  to  love  will  be  essayed  in 
the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

i 

LIFERS    LESSER    ENTHUSIASMS 

"  God  gives  us  love.    "Something  to  love 

He  lends  us;  but  when  love  is  grown 
To  ripeness,  that  on  which  it  throve 
Falls  off,  and  love  is  left  alone." 


THE  word  love  has  as  many  significations 
as  there  are  objects  to  which  it  may  be 
applied  and,  again,  as  many  as  there 
are  individuals  to  make  application  of  it.  To 
give  a  definition  of  it  is  impossible.  No  descrip- 
tion can  do  more  than  point  out  characteristics 
of  some  of  its  particular  manifestations.  In 
the  last  resort  it  is  known  to  us  as  an  elemental 
factor  in  evolution.  As  we  trace  it  back  to  its 
simplest  forms,  we  cannot  stop  when  we  reach 
what  seems  to  us  the  limits  of  conscious  life.  Its 
basic  principle  is  operative  throughout  organic 
nature.  Chemical  affinity  as  well  as  the  phenom- 
ena of  magnetism  and  crystallization  afford  us 
the  most  striking  analogues  of  that  wonderful 
element  which,  even  in  the  most  highly  evolved 
ranges  of  being,  still  persists  as  an  instinctive, 
non-rational  principle  of  action. 

278 


LIFE'S    LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  279 

Not  that  it  persists  in  this  form  alone.  Its 
instinctive  characteristics  have  been  profoundly 
modified  by  intelligence.  There  is  an  unreason- 
ing, mysterious  element  in  every  kind  of  love, 
but  there  is  also,  and  increasingly,  an  intelligent 
side  to  it.  We  still  love  more  or  less  blindly,  but 
ever,  more  and  more,  our  eyes  are  opened  to 
understand  why  we  love,  and  with  this  illumina- 
tion comes  also  the  knowledge  and  the  ability  to 
direct,  regulate,  and  turn  to  the  best  account  that 
elemental  power  which  nature  generates  for  us. 

Another,  hardly  less  conspicuous  and  pro- 
foundly modifying  effect  of  intelligence,  is  the 
multiplication  of  the  outlets  of  love  and  of  the 
objects  on  which  it  expends  itself.  In  the  sim- 
plicity of  primitive  life,  love  finds  only  a  few  well- 
worn  grooves  in  which  to  run.  The  old,  old  story 
repeats  itself  with  varying  incidents  and  intensity 
through  the  ages.  The  love  of  parent  for  child 
and  that  of  offspring  for  parent  broaden  out  into 
devotion  to  the  head  of  the  tribe.  There  is, 
further,  the  love  of  the  chase  and  of  war,  of  the 
favorite  horse  and  dog,  of  weapons  and  ornaments, 
of  the  fetish  and  of  the  consecrated  hearth.  The 
volume  and  intensity  of  the  love  that  so  satisfies 
itself  may  vary  greatly,  but  there  is  almost  no 
lateral  expansion,  no  formation  of  new  channels. 

To  this  the  complex  life  of  civilization  affords 
a  contrast  of  very  great  significance.  Instead  of 
being  forced  into  a  few  stereotyped  ways,  love 
finds  for  itself  innumerable  little  outlets  to  the 


280  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

multiplication  of  which,  as  life  grows  more  elabo- 
rate, there  is  no  end.  We  find  many  made  for 
us,  and  we  continually  make  new  ones  while  we 
consciously  close  others.  For  the  beginnings  of 
these  lesser  loves  which  we  make  for  ourselves 
little  more  is  needed  than  a  degree  of  admiration 
combined  with  attention.  Loves  of  this  kind  are 
continually  springing  up  within  us  in  connection 
with  the  thousand  and  one  influences  that,  in  the 
course  of  a  normal  life,  touch  our  feelings  and 
call  forth  our  sympathetic  regard.  We  love  the 
flowers,  the  sweet  influences  of  the  changing 
seasons,  the  solemn  majesty  of  the  forest,  the 
wind  in  the  tree-tops,  the  light  of  dawn  and  of 
the  setting  sun. 

We  love  individual  men  and  women  in  the  same 
passing  way,  not  only  those  whom  we  meet 
bodily,  but  those  also  who  form  for  us  an  image  in 
the  mind,  the  personalities  that  historians  and 
gifted  writers  of  romance  have  created.  In 
every  case  what  we  love  is  more  or  less  an  idealiza- 
tion, conceived  either  by  ourselves  or  by  some 
other  artist.  It  is  perhaps  only  a  little  spark  of 
love  that  goes  out  to  each  one  of  these  objects 
in  turn,  a  passing  attention  that,  anon,  devotes 
itself  to  other  interests.  But  it  is  the  true  thing. 
The  heart  has  been  touched  in  the  right  way. 
And  if  the  soul  be  in  good  health,  we  are  the  better, 
every  time,  for  the  experience,  —  better  physically, 
mentally,  spiritually.  What  sunshine  does  for 
the  ripening  fruits,  elaborating  in  them  the  higher 


LIFE'S    LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  281 

qualities  of  flavour  and  beauty  and  perfume,  that, 
these  lesser  loves,  these  repeated,  though  short- 
lived activities  of  the  heart,  do  for  the  ripening 
and  refining  of  the  character. 

I  have  said  that  these  are  of  as  many  different 
kinds  as  there  are  individuals  to  love,  or  objects 
and  interests  to  call  forth  love.  But,  we  may 
classify  them,  trace  them  to  a  limited  number  of 
sources,  and  study  them  with  a  view  to  larger 
generalizations. 

Various  lines  of  classification  suggest  themselves. 
The  love  of  persons  constitutes  one  great  group 
by  itself.  The  love  of  things  seems  altogether 
and  quite  distinct  from  it.  And  again,  the  love 
of  interests,  ambitions,  ideals,  is  a  third  group. 
And  fourthly,  there  is  the  vague,  mystical  realm 
in  which  love  dwells,  as  it  were,  in  a  more  or  less 
disembodied  and  unattached  form,  —  the  realm 
of  the  aesthetic,  a  half-understood,  untranslatable, 
but,  very  real  world.  In  this  upper  stratum  of 
feeling  we  grow  into  the  love  of  the  highest  kinds 
of  music,  of  whatsoever  is  noble  in  poetry,  in 
literature,  and  in  art.  It  is  here  also  that  we  are 
drawn  into  that  pure,  uplifting  worship  which 
we  call  the  love  of  nature,  and  here,  greatest  of 
all,  springs  the  love  that,  gathering  all  other 
loves  into  one,  seeks  and  finds  an  embodiment, 
a  spiritual  entity,  that  it  may  worship  with  an 
absolute,  whole-souled  devotion. 

Another  scheme  of  classification  that  separates 
our  loves  into  quite  distinct  groups  is  that  which 


282  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

regards  them  as  related  to  the  past,  the  present, 
or  the  future.  Each  of  these  groups  has  its  own 
peculiar  characteristics.  The  loves  that  are  wholly 
of  the  present  are  rooted  in  the  joy  of  possession. 
That  which  is  loved  may  be  beautiful,  or  valuable 
in  the  eyes  of  the  world  generally,  or  it  may  not. 
The  ground  of  love  is  the  consciousness  of  personal 
proprietorship.  The  rag-baby,  that  is  caressed 
and  petted  to  the  neglect  of  the  magnificent 
productions  of  the  shop,  is  the  type  of  this  form 
of  devotion,  —  "a  poor  thing,  but  mine  own." 
From  this  root  grows  the  passion  for  the  absolute 
ownership  of  a  bit  of  land,  loved  not  because  it 
is  remunerative,  but  because  it  is  personal.  Here 
also  belongs  the  passion  for  owning  that  which 
is  unique,  or  rare,  or  very  difficult  of  attainment; 
and  again  the  love  of  a  secret,  the  knowing  of 
that  which  others  do  not  know;  and  akin  to  this, 
also,  the  love  of  being  the  first  to  discover  what 
has  hitherto  been  a  secret  of  nature,  or  an  unknown 
country,  or  being  able  to  give  the  world  some- 
thing original  in  the  way  of  thought  or  invention. 
It  may  be  the  passionate  and  jealous  love  of 
a  person.  Mine!  mine!  mine!  is  the  cry  of 
the  lover.  Mine  own!  the  fruit  of  my  body, 
mine  to  love,  to  live  for,  to  educate,  is  the  exulting 
soul-song  of  the  parent.  We  often  hear  it  said 
that  love  is  unselfish.  It  has  its  unselfish  side. 
But  it  is  also  the  most  actively,  violently  selfish 
principle  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge. 
Nothing  is  so  cruel,  so  revengeful,  so  utterly 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  283 

implacable  as  love.  Love,  of  some  kind,  is  the 
root  of  all  selfishness.  What  is  selfishness  but 
self-love  run  to  excess  and  madness?  though  self- 
love  in  its  normality  is  the  very  spring  and  motive 
power  of  all  our  higher  life.  It  is  no  more  to  be 
deprecated  than  any  other  kind  of  love.  As 
compared  with  other  kinds  it  is  primus  inter 
pares,  because  all  other  kinds  depend  upon  it. 
It  is  the  living  root  from  which  they  spring  and 
draw  their  nourishment. 

Turning  now  to  the  loves  of  the  past,  those 
which  have  their  attachments  in  bygone  experi- 
ences. These  are  the  loves  of  actual  life,  trans- 
figured, softened,  idealized.  Memory  has  dropped 
the  coarser  elements,  the  restless,  anxious,  dis- 
turbing elements,  and  cast  over  all  a  glamour  like 
that  of  twilight.  It  is  not  all  distinctness,  nor 
all  vagueness,  but  the  two  are  mingled.  Memo- 
ries that  we  love  to  dwell  upon  stand  out  clear 
in  the  pictured  past,  set  in  less  well-defined  but 
hallowed  associations;  and,  beyond  these, 

.  .   .  "those  first  affections, 

Those  shadowy  recollections, 

Which  be  they  what  they  may, 

Are  yet  the  fountain-light  of  all  our  day, 

Are  yet  a  master-light  of  all  our  seeing." 

We,  as  a  rule,  recognize  but  faintly  how  much 
we  owe  to  these  loves  of  the  past,  not  alone  for 
the  refinement  and  solace  of  life,  but  also  for  its 
stability  and  its  inspiration. 


284  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

The  idealized  past  and  the  idealized  future  join 
hands  to  pull  us  through  the  conflicts  and  dis- 
tractions of  the  garish  present.  The  two  stand 
in  the  sharpest  contrast  to  each  other;  the  past 
calling  us  to  reflection  and  contemplative  admira- 
tion, the  future  thrilling  us  with  desire  for  action. 
The  loves  of  the  past  bring  human  experiences 
before  us  in  such  a  form  that  we  can  appropriate 
them,  brood  over  them,  and  by  oft-repeated  com- 
munion, assimilate  them.  Our  imaginations  form 
themselves  upon  them,  acquire  habits  of  admiring 
and  loving  that  which  is  best  worth  loving. 
That  which  has  been  adorable,  the  heroism,  the 
fidelity,  the  heart-kindness,  and  devotion  of  those 
with  whom  we  have  associated,  not  only  in  our 
immediate  lives,  but  also  in  the  pages  of  history 
and  romance,  become  enshrined  in  our  hearts  as 
very  real  things;  and  in  them  we  find,  ready  to 
our  hand,  the  tested  and  approved  materials  with 
which  to  construct  those  ideals  for  future  realiza- 
tion which  become  the  lodestars  of  our  active, 
evolving  souls. 

II 

To  estimate  justly  the  bearing  of  these  minor 
enthusiasms  upon  the  great  end  of  life  we  must 
look  at  them  from  more  than  one  point  of  view. 
One  that  readily  suggests  itself  is  furnished  by 
the  analogical  likeness  which  they  bear  to  the 
plants  and  flowers  which  the  earth  brings  forth 
of  itself.  The  whole  course  of  our  lives  is  glad- 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  285 

dened  by  these  wild-springing  products  of  the 
soul,  and,  as  in  nature  the  plants  and  flowers 
that  the  earth  brings  forth  spontaneously  are  the 
foundation  of  all  that  has  been  achieved  in  agri- 
culture and  horticulture,  by  selection  and  culti- 
vation, so  also  it  is  in  the  improved  fields  and 
gardens  of  the  soul.  It  is  the  lesser  loves  that 
lead  up  to  the  greater  ones.  It  is  the  transient, 
fragmentary,  sporadic  worships  that  show  us 
the  way  to  that  which  is  permanent.  And  in 
the  one  case  as  in  the  other,  the  desirable  out- 
come is  reached  only  by  persistent  and  pains- 
taking effort. 

We  may,  indeed,  profitably  carry  this  analogy 
further  and  say  that,  as  in  the  one  realm  so 
in  the  other,  an  essential  preliminary  is  always 
the  intelligent  selection  of  those  specific  natural 
products  which  are  best  worth  conserving  and 
improving.  That  we  are  daily  throwing  away 
invaluable  opportunities  may  be  assumed  as  cer- 
tain when  we  look  back  upon  the  years  and  ages 
that  men  have  passed  in  blindness  to  potentiali- 
ties which,  when  later  revealed,  seemed  as  evident 
as  sunlight.  These  potentialities  have,  so  to 
speak,  run  to  waste,  wearing  channels  in  our 
experience,  but  helping  us  on  only  in  the  most 
incidental  ways.  We  have  enjoyed  them,  have 
amused  ourselves  with  them,  have  taken  toll  of 
them,  but  how  faintly  have  we  understood  their 
meaning  and  their  possibilities!  What  are  they? 
Whence  have  they  come  to  us?  Are  they  any- 


286  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

thing  more  than  the  fleeting  moods  of  a  highly 
sensitive  nervous  structure?  And  if  so,  if  they 
are  more,  what  implications  as  to  deeper  signifi- 
cance do  they  involve? 

It  will  help  us  to  determine  the  more  if  we 
recognize  fully  that  they  are  this,  —  the  moods 
of  a  highly  sensitive  nervous  organism.  They 
are  the  responses  of  that  organism  to  a  most 
varied  and  heterogeneous  environment.  And  we 
have  to  recognize  further  the  fact  that  they  are 
what  they  are,  because  the  constitution  of  that 
organism  is  what  it  is.  We  are  instruments,  so 
constructed  and  attuned  to  the  world,  that 
strains  harmonious,  or  discordant,  are  produced 
when  we  are  played  upon. 

And  here  another  factor  comes  into  view,  — 
the  agency  that  plays  upon  us.  In  one  case  it 
is,  apparently,  an  impersonal,  unbidden  influence, 
that  sweeps  over  and  through  us  as  the  wind 
through  the  strings  of  an  aeolian  harp.  At  another 
time  it  is  an  influence  flowing  from  some  well- 
defined  external  source:  this  may  be  an  event, 
it  may  be  a  vision  of  something  that  appeals  to 
hope  and  expectation;  it  may  be  the  influence 
of  other  persons  acting  through  sympathy,  per- 
suasion, or  attraction.  And  lastly,  it  may  be 
an  influence  generated  and  operated  within  the 
sphere  of  one's  own  volitional  self.  Each  one  of 
these  classes  is  deeply  significant,  both  in  itself 
considered  and  also  as  related  to  the  other  classes, 
for  each  one  throws  light  upon  the  other. 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  287 

To  begin  with  the  influences  that  work  upon 
us  from  without.  Such  influences  find,  in  every 
case,  an  inborn  germ  to  work  upon.  For  that 
germ  we  are  not  responsible;  for  its  incubation 
and  growth  to  maturity,  we  are.  Now  let  us 
give  our  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  innumerable 
influences  of  this  kind  by  which  we  are  importuned 
are  in  the  general  consensus  of  human  estimation, 
ranged  on  a  fairly  well-defined  scale  of  values. 
Choosing  one  set  of  influences,  we  have  produced 
within  us  enthusiasms  of  a  low  order;  choosing 
another,  we  reach  toward  the  highest.  The 
lower  ones  are  the  more  easy  of  development. 
They  are  quickly  and  cheaply  brought  to  ma- 
turity, and  in  many  cases  they  are  ephemeral, 
leaving  us  as  easily  as  they  came.  But  when 
they  are  recurrent,  repetition  brings  forth  habit, 
and  habit  means  mastery. 

The  production  of  this  class  of  enthusiasms 
occupies  a  very  large  share  of  the  world's  atten- 
tion, partly  because  they  cost  so  little  and  partly 
because  they  can  be  made  so  useful  by  those 
who  exploit  their  fellowmen.  They  can  be  manu- 
factured, so  to  speak,  by  administering  drugs 
to  the  system,  —  alcohol,  nicotine,  opium.  They 
can  be  promoted  by  a  frenzy  of  speculation 
helped  on  by  a  brass  band!  They  can  be  gener- 
ated by  all  kinds  of  sporting  competition  and 
games,  with  money-wagers  for  accessories.  They 
rise  to  fever-heat  in  political  crises,  and  they 
have,  through  all  the  ages,  characterized  unreg- 


288  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

ulated  religious  movements.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  they  have  innumerable  gentler  devel- 
opments. Spontaneous  affection,  the  love  of 
nature  and  the  love  of  music,  the  love  of  any 
kind  of  graceful  or  exhilarating  motion,  the  mere 
exuberance  of  health,  —  all  these,  in  their  simpler 
manifestations,  belong  to  this  same  great  class. 
Different  as  they  are  in  their  qualities  and  ten- 
dencies, they  have  one  important  characteristic 
in  common,  that  is  the  ease  with  which  they  are 
generated. 

For  the  most  part  they  are  permitted,  as 
distinguished  from  cultivated,  enthusiasms.  They 
come  very  largely  without  our  solicitation  and, 
if  we  allow  it,  run  their  own  course  without 
demanding  effort  from  us.  Some  of  them  we 
recognize  as  altogether  mischievous  and  destruc- 
tive. Many  of  them,  on  the  other  hand,  are 
the  first  glimmerings  of  a  light  that  may  be  made 
to  flood  our  whole  lives.  They  cannot  develop 
these  possibilities  of  themselves,  but  they  can 
be  the  assistants,  the  indispensable  coadjutors, 
of  a  higher  range  of  enthusiasms,  the  distin- 
guishing characteristic  of  which  is  a  passion  for 
achievement. 

These  are  the  active,  energizing  enthusiasms, 
that  reach  out  on  all  sides  for  the  materials  and 
the  power  with  which  to  realize  themselves.  And 
the  true  significance  of  the  first  class  is  never 
realized  except  as  its  enthusiasms  are  taken  up 
into  and  made  to  serve  the  second.  These  higher, 


LIFE'S    LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  289 

masterful  enthusiasms  are  the  constructors  of 
character  and  of  society.  They  make  men,  they 
build  up  the  body  politic.  They  carry  the  race 
on  to  higher  and  still  higher  planes  of  evolution. 
But,  no  more  than  the  first  class  are  they  all  good. 
They  tend  to  evil  as  energetically  as  they  tend 
to  good.  And  also,  like  the  former  class,  if 
restricted  simply  to  the  development  of  their 
own  blind  careers,  they  end  in  nothingness. 
Their  true  significance  lies  in  a  something  beyond, 
a  something  which  they,  from  this  side  and  that, 
suggest  and  foreshadow,  but  which  no  one  of 
them,  in  its  isolation,  can  ever  reach.  Each  one 
of  our  nobler  enthusiasms  carries  us  up  to  a 
borderland  of  wonderment  and  there  leaves  us. 
It  shows  us  that  there  is  a  beyond,  it  suggests 
that  it  contains  values  far  greater  than  any  that 
we  have  known,  but  it  cannot  tell  us  anything 
more. 

Ill 

Now  for  a  somewhat  different  point  of  view. 
In  all  our  thought,  thus  far,  we  have  objectified 
these  influences,  treated  them  as  something  not- 
ourselves,  things  springing  up  within  us,  but  not 
a  part  of  us,  agents  that  act  upon  us  and  upon 
which  we  in  turn  react.  But  now  we  have  to 
remind  ourselves  that  this  way  of  regarding  them 
is  purely  provisional.  Really  and  essentially  these 
springing  enthusiasms  are  ourselves.  Each  one, 
as  it  makes  its  appearance,  is  the  realization  of 

19 


290  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

a  new  phase  of  the  soul.  It  opens  to  us  new 
possibilities  of  being,  new  modes  of  feeling.  In 
short,  it  introduces  us  to  a  self  in  some  respects 
quite  different  from  any  self  that  we  have  known 
before. 

But  to  what  does  this  bring  us?  a  plurality 
of  selves?  To  say  this  would  be  misleading; 
yet  experiences  that  suggest  such  a  state  of 
things  are  familiar  to  every  one  of  us.  A  perfect 
unity  of  personality  is  a  condition  not-yet- 
achieved;  it  is  an  ideal  toward  which  we  are 
moving,  and  a  conspicuous  feature  of  our  present 
stage  of  self-realization  is,  even  with  those  most 
advanced,  its  fragmentariness.  Though  we  know 
the  self  we  are  trying  to  realize  to  be  a  unity,  a 
personality,  the  one  indivisible  reality  of  our  con- 
sciousness, yet  we  have  to  recognize  the  fact  that 
we  know  ourselves  largely  in  detachments, — 
almost,  in  fact,  as  if  we  were  not  one,  but  a  com- 
munity of  more  or  less  heterogeneous  individuals 
associated  in  one  household. 

We  are  prone  to  characterize  others  as  incon- 
sistent and  to  find  fault  with  them  because  they 
show  us  different  sides  of  their  many-sided  selves 
at  different  times.  Or,  perhaps,  if  we  do  not 
find  fault  we  mentally  apologize  for  what  we  call 
their  moods;  and  yet,  if  we  have  the  smallest 
amount  of  self-knowledge,  we  know  ourselves 
to  be  quite  different  people  at  different  times, 
and  not  infrequently,  in  moments  of  indecision, 
a  number  of  different  people  at  the  same  time. 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  291 

In  other  words,  that  gradual  organization  of 
experience  that  builds  up  the  conscious-self 
within  us  proceeds  not  in  one  line,  but  in  many, 
sometimes  apparently  divergent,  lines. 

Now,  in  order  to  accomplish  anything  in  this 
world,  we  have  to  concentrate.  This  means 
conscious  organization,  a  more  or  less  determined 
realization  of  self  in  a  chosen  direction,  and  it 
also  involves  turning  our  backs  for  a  time,  at 
least,  on  a  number  of  other  interests  that  may 
be  the  specialties  of  our  friends  and  neighbours. 
I  have  said  this  is  a  necessity.  It  is  also  an  evil, 
not  simply  in  the  general  way  of  being  a  limita- 
tion; it  is  a  positive  evil,  in  that  it  has  a  tendency 
to  contract  and  distort  that  self  which  asks  for 
a  symmetrical,  comprehensive  development.  Only 
in  a  few  cases  do  we  encounter  the  extreme  of 
this  tendency.  And  when  we  do,  we  call  it 
insanity,  monomania.  But  we  know  that  we 
all  have  the  seeds  of  this  kind  of  insanity  within 
us  whenever  we  are  in  earnest  about  anything. 

For  the  preservation  of  that  mental  balance 
which  we  call  sanity  we  are  confronted  with 
another  necessity.  We  are  constrained  to  give 
ourselves  heartily  to  the  cultivation  of  some 
other  interest,  or  interests,  which  are  for  the  time 
quite  unassociated  with  this  one  to  which  we  have 
pledged  ourselves.  Ordinarily,  environment  pre- 
sents us  with  invitations,  more  or  less  urgent, 
in  a  variety  of  directions.  Family  and  social 
life  put  in  their  claims  for  a  share  of  our  attention, 


292  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

and,  if  we  respond  to  these  heartily,  letting  an 
appreciable  volume  of  our  sympathy  and  vitality 
go  out  to  them,  we  realize  a  self  that  is  quite 
distinct  from  the  self  that  is  developed  in  our 
business,  or  profession.  In  every  kind  of  recrea- 
tion, in  every  kind  of  keen  enjoyment,  we  come 
upon  a  somewhat  different  self,  that  sometimes 
surprises  us  beyond  measure.  And  this  surprise, 
this  discovery  of  new  capabilities,  is  the  source 
of  our  greatest  pleasure  when  we  turn  from  one 
occupation  to  another. 

Repeated  experiences  of  this  kind  of  pleasure 
give  rise  in  many  to  a  craving  for  constant  change, 
that  defeats  the  ends  of  self-realization  by  the 
absence  of  continuity.  We  become  so  many 
selves  that  we  have  no  particular  self.  We  lack 
individuality.  We  are  not  building  anything  in 
the  way  of  character.  We  add  nothing  to  the 
capital  of  life.  We  are  simply  spending.  We 
must  then  turn  back  to  concentration  as  the 
fundamental  principle  of  the  growth  of  personality. 
There  must  be  one  absorbing,  dominant  interest 
to  which  all  others  are  tributary.  Our  mani- 
fold adjustments,  with  a  view  to  this  subordina- 
tion and  organization,  are  the  commonplaces  of 
everyday  life.  We  engage  in  a  variety  of  occu- 
pations that  are  not  directly  connected  with  each 
other,  that  we  may  advance  to  the  achievement 
of  some  definite  end,  or  the  satisfaction  of  some 
special  instinct  that,  looked  at  from  the  outside, 
is  quite  remote  from  any  one  of  them. 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  293 

An  illustration  of  this  might  be  as  follows. 
The  indispensable  condition  of  my  success,  as 
regards  the  main  purpose  of  my  life,  is  the  posses- 
sion of  a  sound  mind  in  a  sound  body.  Without 
that  I  can  neither  be,  nor  enjoy,  that  which  the 
ideal  end  of  my  striving  has  promised  me.  For 
the  possession  of  this  I  must  distribute  my  vitality 
in  a  variety  of  directions  that  have  only  an  in- 
direct bearing  on  my  main  purpose.  If  I  starve 
myself  bodily,  mentally,  or  emotionally,  I  am 
rendering  the  realization  of  the  ideal  self  incom- 
plete to  the  extent  of  the  starvation. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  I  allow  myself  to  fall 
into  greediness  in  any  one  of  these  directions, 
because  of  their  pleasantness,  I  shall  quite  as 
certainly  fall  short  of  the  end  that  I  am  trying  to 
work  out.  Every  one  of  these  subsidiary  activities 
is  good  and  wholesome.  But  each  one  of  them, 
as  if  jealous  of  the  others,  is  capable  of  playing 
the  part  of  betrayal  in  the  attempt  to  capture 
and  control  me.  If  I  am,  hi  any  measure,  equal 
to  the  situation,  if  I  am  wise  in  the  selection  of 
my  activities  and  firm  in  their  control,  they  will 
be  not  only  my  useful  servants,  but  also  my 
devoted  friends.  The  pleasures  they  are  capable 
of  giving  will  be  enhanced  tenfold  because  of  the 
object  to  which  they  are  tributary.  They  are 
something  more  and  quite  other  than  themselves; 
they  are  ennobled  by  the  noble  end  which  they 
serve. 

Now  let  us  observe  that  this  kind  of  subordina- 


294  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

tion  exists  on  a  great  variety  of  scales.  The 
end  that  we  have  called  the  nobler  one  may  be 
only  relatively  noble.  It  is  something  that  promises 
a  larger,  more  satisfactory  self  as  related  to  those 
other  ends  that  are  tributary  to  it.  But,  anon, 
the  horizon  widens,  a  more  extended  vista  is 
open  to  us.  New  desires  are  formed  and  objects 
or  ends,  hitherto  unseen,  outline  themselves  and 
become  the  characteristics  of  a  still  larger  ideal 
self.  Hence  a  necessity  of  reorganization.  That 
which  has  been  the  dominant  interest  becomes 
secondary,  subsidiary,  if  it  fits  into  the  reorgan- 
ization. If  it  does  not,  it  remains  outside,  left 
behind,  an  arrested  development. 

This  leaving  behind  of  an  old  self  is  often  a 
painful  business.  While  we  have  a  vivid  appre- 
hension of  something  better  and  higher,  and  are 
strongly  impelled  by  our  moral  instincts  to  achieve 
it,  the  old  self  holds  us  with  the  tenacious  grip  of 
habit.  The  new  conception  that  has  made  us 
restless  seems  to  demand  a  change  of  constitution, 
a  new  birth,  and  in  the  lives  of  most  of  us  there 
are  crises  that  correspond  to  these  seemings. 
Now  all  revolutions  are,  in  themselves,  things  to 
be  deplored.  However  necessary,  they  are  dis- 
organizing. They  break  up  the  order  that  has 
been,  without  at  once  establishing  a  new  con- 
trolling order.  If  frequent,  they  are  altogether 
demoralizing.  To  avoid  them,  if  possible,  is 
the  counsel  of  wisdom.  How  to  do  this  is  one  of 
our  difficult  problems. 


LIFE'S   LESSER   ENTHUSIASMS  295 

Not  that  the  end  to  be  attained  is  obscure. 
By  a  number  of  different  paths,  different  sets  of 
inferences  and  constraining  necessities,  we  have, 
in  the  course  of  our  discussion,  been  brought  up 
to  the  recognition  of  one  definite  requirement; 
namely,  the  conception  and  the  adoption  of  an 
end  so  high  that  no  other  one  can  ever  get  above 
it,  —  an  object  of  reverence  and  worship  so  com- 
prehensive, so  inexhaustible,  that  we  can  never 
weary,  never  be  thrown  out  of  the  running  through 
having  come  to  the  end  of  it. 

And  further,  we  have  seen  that  there  exists 
for  each  one  of  us  an  objective  end,  embodying 
to  the  full  all  these  qualities,  —  a  living  respond- 
ing reality,  distinctly  conceived  and  yet,  as  re- 
lated to  our  minds,  one  that  is  always  growing 
and  expanding.  But,  it  is  one  thing  to  be  per- 
suaded of  the  existence  of  such  a  reality,  to 
intellectually  approve  it  as  the  solution  of  life's 
great  problem,  and  quite  another  thing  to  appro- 
priate it,  to  make  it  actually  and  vitally,  in  per- 
sonal experience,  the  grand  motive  of  life.  This 
is  something  to  be  achieved.  How  to  make  that 
which  we  intellectually  and  morally  approve 
identical  with  that  which  we  love  and  live  for,  is 
to  progressively  work  out  our  own  salvation. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  WILL  TO   LOVE 

CAN  we,  by  willing  to  do  so,  make  that 
which  we  intellectually  approve,  identical 
with  that  which  we  love  and  live  for? 
In  other  words,  can  we,  by  this  means,  come  to 
know    personally    and    experimentally    the    God 
Whom  we  know  theoretically? 

In  the  chapter  before  the  last  we  outlined  the 
general  principle  by  means  of  which  it  is  possible 
to  transform  indeterminate  concepts  into  efficient 
agencies,  and  we  considered  the  process  by  which 
the  will  can  establish  in  the  mind  dominating 
intellectual  convictions  for  the  regulation  of  life. 
It  remains  for  us  to  follow  out  the  same  general 
line  of  thought,  as  related  to  the  establishment  hi 
the  soul  of  a  central,  all-controlling  enthusiasm, 
a  love  to  God  that  shall  make  all  things  tributary 
to  it.  It  is  perhaps  needless  to  say  that  we  do  not 
claim  for  the  will  any  immediately  coercive  power 
in  this  direction.  Will  and  intelligence  must 
move  together.  Intelligence,  without  will,  is  im- 
potent. Will,  without  intelligence,  is  blind.  To- 
gether they  can  remove  mountains.  Intelligence 

296 


THE   WILL   TO    LOVE  297 

must  first  study  out  the  ways  of  doing  things.  It 
must  sort  out  from  experience  those  elements  that 
are  serviceable,  that  throw  light  upon  the  prob- 
lem in  hand,  that  have  perhaps  already  partially 
solved  it.  Then  the  will  brings  to  bear  its  power 
of  concentrating  attention. 

Herein  lies  the  secret  of  all  achievement.  The 
will  has  the  control  of  the  situation,  if  it  has  pre- 
served and  strengthened  its  power  of  compelling 
attention.  This  is  the  condition  of  progress  in 
any  direction,  not  alone  in  the  sphere  of  religion, 
but  in  all  spheres.  We  live  in  the  world  sur- 
rounded by  untold  resources,  the  potency  of 
which  is  for  the  most  part  hidden  from  us.  Having 
eyes  we  see  not,  having  ears  we  hear  not,  neither 
do  we  understand.  We  are  half-conscious  of  the 
outsides  of  things,  of  their  appeals  to  the  senses; 
but,  of  their  values  we  know  only  so  much  as  the 
will  forces  from  them  by  the  application  of  its 
great  solvent,  attention. 

There  is  a  religious  side  to  all  the  activities  that 
make  for  the  enlargement  and  deepening  of  life, 
or  that  contribute  in  any  way  to  human  welfare, 
if  we  set  ourselves  to  find  it  and  to  live  in  the  light 
of  it.  A  great  hindrance  to  the  development  of  a 
unifying,  all-controlling  love  to  God  has  been  the 
extent  to  which  we  have  been  in  the  habit  of 
satisfying  our  religious  natures  in  a  special  and 
somewhat  separate  department  of  experience. 
This  is  not  said  in  disparagement  of  that  special 
department.  Modern  thought  is  not  the  whole 


298  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

of  thought.  The  land  which  it  is  taking  posses- 
sion of  has  been  long  occupied.  Great  and  rich 
cities  with  rival  interests  have  held  sway  within 
it.  Modern  thought  comes,  not  pre-eminently  to 
destroy,  but  to  conserve,  to  rescue,  to  reconstruct, 
and  to  vitalize.  Modern  thought  is  the  offspring 
of  ancient  thought,  and  has  drawn  its  sustenance 
from  it.  The  specialized  form  of  worship  that  we 
have  inherited  has  not  come  to  the  end  of  its 
usefulness  because  religion  is  called  to  undertake 
a  wider  jurisdiction  and  a  more  complete  control 
of  life. 

The  language  of  religion  that  has  come  to  us 
through  the  Church,  its  lofty  and  loving  concep- 
tions of  God,  its  reverence-inspiring  ascriptions, 
its  creeds,  in  so  far  as  they  are  expressed  in  terms 
of  devotion,  constitute  a  life-giving  atmosphere, 
a  spiritual  ozone  for  vitalizing,  purifying,  and 
inspiring  our  lives.  We  live  in  these  symbols  as 
we  live  in  the  social  medium,  without  thinking  of 
it.  We  have  been  moulded  by  them.  Whether 
conscious  of  them  or  not,  they  are  organic  con- 
stituents of  the  world  hi  which  we  move.  To 
foster  them,  nourish  them,  and  protect  them,  as 
the  most  valuable  and  vital  products  of  human 
evolution,  is  the  highest  wisdom.  To  permit 
them  to  grow  dun,  to  become  dishonoured  and 
made  ineffective  through  neglect,  is  to  trifle  away 
our  best  inheritance. 

The  formulated  creeds  that  have  come  down 
to  us  are  like  monuments  in  stone,  marking  the 


THE   WILL   TO    LOVE  299 

crises  through  which  the  Church  has  passed  in 
its  struggle  upward  to  the  light.  They  are  the 
records  of  well-fought  battles,  —  ancient  fortifi- 
cations, fashioned  to  withstand  the  inroads  of  a 
different  environment  from  that  which  surrounds 
us  to-day.  The  creeds,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
have  come  to  us  in  the  devotional  language  of 
the  Church,  —  in  its  prayers  and  psalmody  and 
music,  in  its  inspired  outbursts  of  God-conscious- 
ness that  makes  us  sharers  of  the  divine  experi- 
ences of  those  who  have  lived  in  the  far-away 
past,  —  these  are  the  living  spirit  that  those  old 
walls  of  faith  were  built  to  protect  in  ages  of 
narrower  outlooks.  They  served  the  exigencies 
of  their  day;  they  are  historic  relics  now;  while 
the  religion  that  they  shielded  has  come  out  into 
a  larger  place  and,  with  new  hope,  looks  toward 
a  future  of  indefinite  expansion. 

In  our  devotional  expressions  of  faith  there  is 
little  to  alter.  We  may  wish  to  prune  here  and 
there,  to  cut  out  withered  branches;  but,  for  the 
most  part,  the  old  language  rings  true.  We 
worship  and  refresh  our  souls  in  the  old  phrases, 
and  feel  that  no  others  could  serve  our  spirits  half 
so  well.  The  God  to  Whom  we  pray  is  the  God 
of  the  Prophets,  of  the  benignant  Psalms,  the 
God  of  Jesus  and  of  His  Apostles,  the  God  of  the 
spirits  and  souls  of  the  righteous  in  all  ages.  He 
is  the  God  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  the 
Almighty  and  Everlasting  God,  the  merciful 
Father;  the  Eternal  God  Who  alone  spreadest 


300  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

out  the  heavens  and  rulest  the  raging  of  the  sea; 
He  is  the  giver  of  all  good  gifts,  Who  openeth 
His  hand  and  fillest  all  things  living  with  plente- 
ousness;  He  is  the  high  and  mighty  Ruler  of  the 
universe;  He  is  the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all 
mankind;  He  is  the  Father  of  Our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  our  Father. 

We  cannot,  as  I  have  said,  exaggerate  the  im- 
portance of  this  part  of  our  religion.  But,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  conservation  of  this,  the  will-power  of 
to-day  has  another  most  impprtant  and  serious 
task  laid  upon  it.  It  must  bring  attention  to 
bear,  with  all  its  constructive  gifts  of  imagination 
and  idealization,  upon  the  discovery  of  God  in  all 
the  activities  and  enthusiasms  of  life.  Not  in  all, 
at  once.  The  first  clear  sight  of  God,  outside  the 
formal  worship  of  Him,  comes  through  a  great 
variety  of  experiences:  to  one  through  the  love 
of  some  other  human  being,  to  another  through 
the  love  of  nature,  to  another  through  the  binding 
up  of  the  wounds  caused  by  disappointment  or 
bereavement.  "Man's  extremity  is  God's  oppor- 
tunity." 

For  many  of  us,  the  most  direct  way  to  God 
from  the  secular  life  is  through  the  reverence 
we  conceive  for  some  of  our  fellow-mortals. 
Idealized  men  and  women  become  the  stepping- 
stones  by  which  we  climb  to  higher  things.  Some 
of  us  come  in  contact  with  such  in  the  intimate 
relations  of  our  lives.  But,  the  principle  is  more 
conspicuously  illustrated  in  the  feeling  of  reverence 


THE    WILL   TO    LOVE  301 

and  love  and  loyalty  that  attaches  itself  to  those 
who  have  demonstrated  their  greatness  hi  wider 
fields  —  the  leaders  and  saviours  of  men. 

This  is  a  feeling  that  is  sometimes  strong 
enough  to  suggest  how  one's  whole  life  may  become 
centred  hi  another  personality  and  be  lifted  by  it 
into  a  higher  atmosphere.  In  the  words  of  Carry  le, 
"No  nobler  feeling  than  this  of  admiration  for  one 
higher  than  himself  dwells  in  the  breast  of  man. 
It  is  to  this  hour,  and  at  all  hours,  the  vivifying 
influence  in  man's  life."  *  In  so  far  as  such  a 
love  is  instinctive,  it  is  the  outgrowth  of  man's 
highest  and  most  cultivated  instincts.  If  deep- 
seated  and  abiding,  it  rests  upon  judgments, 
moral  discernments,  that  have  grown  up  gradually 
in  connection  with  life's  manifold  experiences. 
The  great  man  is  the  objective  reflex  of  an  ideal 
that  has  been  moulded  with  the  careful  pains- 
taking of  the  sculptor  who  makes,  unmakes,  and 
remakes  the  outlines  of  the  clay  that  is  to  em- 
body his  vision.  An  essentially  mean  man  can- 
not admire  a  great  one.  Only  in  so  far  as  we  are 
noble  in  ourselves  can  we  fasten  to  the  nobility 
of  another  and  be  lifted  by  it  to  still  higher 
things. 

In  such  enthusiasms  the  idea  may  be  quite 
independent  of  the  physical  embodiment  of  the 
person  who  is  the  object  of  it.  Few  of  us  have 
the  good  fortune  to  know  at  first  hand  our  great 
contemporaries,  if  such  there  be.  And,  if  we  have 

*  Carlyle's  "  Hero- Worship,"  p.  14. 


302  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

what  we  call  a  personal  acquaintance  with  them, 
the  feeling  of  reverence  is  not  necessarily  aug- 
mented thereby.  That  there  is  such  a  thing  as 
physical  charm,  personal  magnetism,  is  not  ques- 
tioned. But,  on  the  other  hand,  many  of  our 
devoted  attachments  are  fixed  upon  those  who 
are  no  longer  of  this  earth.  And  yet  we  know 
them  personally  quite  as  truly  and  perhaps  more 
purely  and  essentially  than  those  others  whose 
hands  we  have  grasped,  whose  eyes  we  have  looked 
into,  whose  smiles,  or  frowns,  we  have  felt. 

We  know  and  love  the  personality  of  those 
exponents  of  our  race  who,  ages  ago,  gave  us  the 
Psalms  and  the  grand  utterances  of  the  Prophets. 
They  impressed  not  only  themselves,  but  also 
the  God,  Whom  they  loved  and  worshipped,  upon 
all  subsequent  ages.  His  individuality  was  as 
clear  and  distinct  to  them  as  that  of  the  men 
who  lived  and  spoke  and  ate  with  them,  yet, 
transcending  human  experience,  it  lifted  its  wor- 
shippers out  of  themselves. 

They  asked  not  to  see  His  form,  nor  any  ma- 
terial image  of  Him.  Such  a  thought  was  sacrilege. 
But,  for  all  that,  they  knew  Him.  His  thoughts, 
His  ways,  His  works,  were  everywhere  in  evidence. 
The  heavens  proclaimed  them,  sun  and  moon 
and  stars,  the  seas  and  floods,  the  winds  of  God, 
Summer  and  Winter,  dews  and  frosts,  mountains, 
and  hills,  all  green  things  upon  the  earth,  fowls 
of  the  air,  beasts  and  cattle,  spirits  and  souls  of 
the  righteous,  holy  and  humble  men  of  heart,  — 


THE    WILL   TO    LOVE  303 

all  these  were  to  them  the  living,  never-silent 
expressions  of  His  manifold  personality. 

The  grand  thoughts  that  they  were  permitted 
to  utter  were  only  the  echo  of  the  grander  psalmody 
of  the  universe,  to  which  they  had  listened  with 
attentive  spirits.  "How  precious  also  are  Thy 
thoughts  unto  me,  O  God!  How  great  is  the 
sum  of  them!  If  I  should  count  them  they  are 
more  in  number  than  the  sand!  When  I  awake  I 
am  still  with  Thee." 

If,  in  those  far-away  simple  ages,  before  the 
revelations  of  science  had  so  immensely  extended 
the  field  of  our  knowledge,  men  could  be  over- 
whelmed with  the  multiplicity  of  God's  revela- 
tion of  Himself,  what  shall  we  say  of  an  age 
pulsating  with  new  discoveries,  new  expressions 
of  His  power,  hitherto  undreamed-of  disclosures 
of  the  manifold  elaborateness  of  His  methods? 
Have  we  permitted  all  this  added  knowledge  to 
build  up  a  wall  of  partition  between  Him  and  us? 
Dazed  with  the  magnitude  of  our  discoveries, 
have  we  taken  to  worshipping  these,  in  the  place 
of  the  great  soul  of  things  that  informs  them 
all?  Is  there,  in  the  nature  of  things,  a  neces- 
sity for  such  a  change  of  attitude?  Was  the 
insight  of  the  Hebrew  seers  conditioned  upon  the 
simplicity  of  their  conceptions?  And  must  we, 
in  this  more  enlightened  age,  be  despoiled  of  all 
the  poetry  and  uplift  of  our  souls  because  we 
know  so  much? 

There  surely  is  a  better  way,  a  way  with  which 


304  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

we  are  familiar,  and  of  which  we  make  constant 
use  in  other  relations  of  life.  Do  we  lose  our 
regard  for  the  work  of  a  great  master  in  painting 
because  we  have  visited  a  studio  and  been  made 
acquainted  with  the  mechanical  part  of  his  work? 
Do  we  cease  to  be  moved  by  noble  music  when 
we  have  learned  the  structure  of  instruments,  the 
laws  of  vibrations,  or  the  fact  that  music  itself  can 
be  stated  in  mathematical  terms? 

To  illustrate  the  application  of  this,  let  us 
imagine  ourselves  before  the  work  of  some  truly 
great  artist,  that  has  stirred  thought  and  feeling, 
and  lifted  us  for  a  time  into  a  higher  atmosphere. 
Suddenly,  by  some  inconsequence  of  thought,  we 
revert  to  earth  and  begin  to  reflect  upon  the 
means  by  which  the  picture  has  been  produced,  — 
how  it  came  to  be  what  it  is,  what  vehicles  of 
expression  were  used,  the  nature  of  the  canvas,  the 
pigments  and  their  chemical  constitution.  The 
picture,  by  this  means,  is  resolved  into  a  mass  of 
heterogeneous,  unmeaning  crudities.  Its  glories 
have  faded  into  the  light  of  common  day.  How, 
we  ask,  can  these  things,  or  any  combination  of 
them,  have  produced  the  wonderful  effects  that 
still  linger  in  our  memories?  Clearly  we  must 
look  beyond  them  for  an  explanation  of  the 
phenomena.  We  must  look  from  the  materials  to 
the  manipulator. 

Human  hands  combined  these  pigments. 
Human  hands  stretched  the  canvas  to  receive 
them.  A  human  hand  travelled  long  and  dili- 


THE   WILL   TO    LOVE  305 

gently  over  this  surface,  distributing  the  colours 
here  and  there,  till  this  strange  result  was  reached. 
What  moved  that  hand?  Muscles,  nerves,  and 
a  vast  complexity  of  organs,  on  the  activity  of 
which  they  were  dependent.  What  was  the  secret 
of  all  this  activity  of  the  organism?  In  the  first 
place  vital  force,  a  principle  that  no  one  knows 
anything  about  except  that  it  seems  allied  to 
and  transmutable  into  all  other  forms  of  force 
that  manifest  themselves  in  the  world  about  us; 
and,  in  the  second  place,  nutrition.  Beef  and 
potatoes,  bread  and  sausages,  coffee  and  tea, 
wine  and  water,  all  kinds  of  food  and  drink  were 
supplied  to  this  complex  organism,  were  assim- 
ilated by  it,  and  transformed  into  the  activities 
that  have  produced  the  picture  in  which  we  are 
interested. 

How  very  unsatisfactory!  We  must  look  else- 
where. The  effect  that  the  picture  produced  was 
clearly  not  a  thing  external  to  us,  it  was  a  personal 
experience.  How  did  it  come  about?  Continu- 
ing the  same  method,  we  come  upon  an  organism 
that  has  a  like  nature  with  the  one  we  have  been 
studying;  that  is,  our  own  receptive  organism. 
Waves  of  light  have  transmitted  influences  stored 
up  in  the  picture  by  organism  number  one,  to 
organism  number  two,  which  we  call  ours.  These, 
coming  in  contact  with  sensitive  parts  of  that 
organism,  have  been  transmitted  by  different 
nerves  to  certain  cells  of  the  brain,  these  have 
organized  themselves  in  a  peculiar  way,  and  as  a 
20 


306  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

result  the  impressions  of  which  we  were  conscious 
ensued. 

An  explanation  of  this  kind,  to  be  exhaustive, 
would  include,  more  or  less  directly,  all  the 
agencies  that  have  been  at  work  in  the  world, 
and  when  the  whole  story  is  told  we  are  none 
the  wiser.  For,  when  we  reach  the  end,  the 
unanswerable  question  arises,  What  am  I?  And 
this  the  study  of  all  the  instrumentalities  that 
have  ever  been  cannot  touch.  We  must  begin 
all  over  again,  taking  our  stand  on  the  two  original 
concrete  realities  of  which  we  are  sure:  first,  the 
effect  produced  in  us  by  the  picture,  and  second, 
the  picture,  in  which  we  have  to  recognize  another 
concrete  reality  standing  out  there  as  part  of  a 
world  which,  though  it  appears  to  be  of  a  totally 
different  order  from  mind,  yet  is  capable  of  pro- 
ducing mental  and  emotional  effects.  It  must  be, 
therefore,  that  this  second  concrete  reality,  as 
related  to  our  minds,  is  nothing  more  nor  less 
than  a  transmitting  agency,  a  means  of  com- 
munication, a  language  by  which  we  are  brought 
into  vital  relations  to  another  mind. 

As  matter  of  fact,  we  know,  by  a  process  of 
analogical  reasoning,  so  familiar  to  us  that  we  take 
no  note  of  it,  that  this  picture  existed  in  the  mind 
of  its  creator  before  it  ever  existed  in  the  form 
of  which  we  are  cognizant.  We  know,  moreover, 
that  the  same  mind  that  originally  conceived  the 
picture  has  been  at  work,  discriminating,  select- 
ing, combining,  through  every  stage  of  the  process 


THE   WILL   TO   LOVE  307 

by  which  it  has  come  to  be  what  it  is.  With  a 
wisdom  and  skill  that  the  novice  is  utterly  at  a 
loss  to  follow,  the  artist  has  moved  on,  step  by 
step,  marshalling  these  crude,  senseless,  unmean- 
ing things  into  such  relations  to  each  other  that 
they  convey  to  another  mind  the  most  delicate 
shades  of  feeling. 

Now,  let  us  ask,  whence  come  these  emotional 
effects?  They  are  clearly  something  common  to 
the  experience  both  of  the  artist  and  of  ourselves. 
They  are  realities  that  have  grown  up  in  him  and 
in  us  by  virtue  of  a  common  nature.  They  may 
have  been  more  or  less  latent  in  him  until  he  gave 
expression  to  them;  they  may  have  been  latent 
in  us  until  his  expression  brought  them  into  con- 
sciousness. But,  even  so,  what  are  they  and  what 
do  they  mean?  What  is  the  explanation  of  their 
presence?  The  picture  represents  something  in 
the  world  of  external  reality,  —  it  may  be  a  bit 
of  natural  scenery,  it  may  be  a  human  face.  But 
here  again  we  come  up  against  the  same  wall  of 
material  things.  The  bit  of  nature,  the  human 
face  are  made  of  the  same  stuff  as  the  picture; 
that  is,  of  things  as  material  and  meaningless  in 
themselves. 

We  say  these  things  affect  us  because  we  have 
associations  with  them.  But,  if  it  is  through 
association  with  inanimate  things  that  we  have 
come  by  these  ennobling  sentiments  we  must 
again  fall  back  upon  the  inference  that  the 
combinations  of  material  things,  that  we  call 


308  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

phases  of  nature,  are  also  transmitting  agencies. 
There  is  a  mind  working  behind  them  and  in 
them.  They  are  but  the  outward  expression  of 
the  love  and  the  grandeur,  of  the  gentleness  and 
harmony,  of  the  depth  and  purity,  of  some  Being 
immeasurably  greater  than  ourselves,  in  whose 
thought  and  love  we  are  able  to  participate  be- 
cause we  are  his  offspring,  because  we  share  his 
nature,  and  because  we  are  ever  more  made  con- 
scious of  new  and  springing  capabilities  in  this 
direction. 

So  also,  it  is  our  privilege  to  know  and  to  feel 
God  in  every  good  word  and  action  of  our  fellow- 
men.  He,  when  we  get  to  the  bottom  of  the 
matter,  has  inspired  it  all.  We  honour  man  no 
less,  for  he  also  has  been  the  author  of  the  good 
thought  and  the  good  act.  But  God  it  is  Who 
has  been  working  in  him  from  first  to  last.  To 
know  what  God  is  like,  we  have  only  to  look  in 
the  faces  of  the  best  men  and  women  who  are 
living  about  us.  If  their  faces  have  been  moulded 
to  nobleness  and  benignity  it  is  the  greatest  of 
all  artists  who  has  been  the  sculptor.  If  noble 
thoughts  have  dwelt  within  this  man,  not  he 
alone  has  been  the  thinker.  God  has  thought 
with  him,  supplementing,  perfecting,  harmonizing, 
sublimating.  So  also,  when  we  look  into  our- 
selves, every  noble  impulse,  every  incentive  to 
better  things,  every  inspiring  glimpse  of  a  more 
satisfactory  self  to  be  attained,  is  a  movement  of 
God  in  us. 


THE    WILL   TO   LOVE  309 

The  idealizing  faculty,  by  which  we  are  per- 
mitted to  construct  a  conception  of  that  better- 
self,  is  also  His  faculty,  His  medium  of  direct 
communication  with  us.  It  is  the  language  in 
which  He  speaks  to  us,  encouraging,  sustaining, 
luring  us  on  with  hopes  and  promises.  We  some- 
times speak  of  "the  smiles  of  an  approving  con- 
science." Why  not  say  "the  smiles  of  God"? 
"Lift  Thou  up  the  light  of  Thy  countenance  upon 
us"  should  be  our  daily  prayer,  and  the  fulfilment 
of  it  our  abounding  and  all-sufficient  happiness. 

When  our  eyes  have  been  once  opened  to  this 
greatest  of  all  realities,  it  is  like  the  rising  of  the 
sun  over  a  benighted  land.  One  point  after 
another  of  our  world  is  touched  by  its  gilding 
rays,  then  all  the  uplands  are  illuminated,  then 
its  life-giving  beams  penetrate  to  the  valleys  and 
light  up  its  darkest  glens.  Every  lovable  thing 
hi  this  world  is  educating  us  for  this  experience, 
and  every  lovable  thing  is  transitory  for  the  very 
reason  that  it  exists  for  the  purpose  of  lifting  us 
into  something  inexpressibly  higher,  more  satis- 
factory, more  enduring,  than  itself. 


APPENDIX  A 

The  Evidential  Value  of  Analogy 

ALL    our    constructive    knowledge    is    condi- 
tioned upon  one  great  fact  of  the  universe 
that  underlies  it.     Experience  has  demon- 
strated that  the  universe  is,  to  a  very  great 
extent,  a  series  of  modified  repetitions,  so  that  an  inti- 
mate knowledge  of  any  one  part  of  it  is,  within  certain 
limits,  a  true  guide  to  the  interpretation  of  other  parts 
of  it  and,  progressively,  to  every  part.     On  this  fact 
all  our  analogical  thinking  hinges;  and,  so  far  as  elab- 
orated knowledge   is   concerned,   all  pur  progress  is 
dependent  upon  the  use  of  analogy. 

The  intellectual  process  through  which  our  knowl- 
edge is  continually  extending  its  bounds  has  three 
well  defined  stages  which  are  interdependent.  These 
three  stages  we  may  call  investigation,  speculation, 
substantiation. 

The  first  and  the  last  of  these  are  the  prosaic  parts 
of  knowledge-getting.  They  have  to  do  with  the 
actualities  of  the  world,  and  involve  plodding,  labor- 
ious application  to  details.  The  middle  term  or 
stage  is,  on  the  contrary,  an  activity  of  the  imagina- 
tive faculty,  in  the  exercise  of  which,  construction  is 
absolutely  unfettered.  Like  a  sorcerer,  it  makes  and 
unmakes,  builds  and  destroys  without  stint.  In  it 
the  poetry  of  the  world  takes  its  rise,  and  inheres. 

311 


312  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

Without  it  there  would  be  no  enthusiasm  in  living,  no 
idealizing,  no  uplift  from  the  heavy,  dull  round  of 
necessary  occupation.  It  is  the  very  soul  of  art.  It 
is  the  solace  of  our  quiet  hours;  it  is  also  the  insti- 
gator of  all  our  bravest  and  noblest  endeavours.  It 
holds  us  to  our  purposes,  makes  us  strong  in  adver- 
sity, loyal  in  the  presence  of  seductions.  It  is  the 
faculty  by  which  we  transcend  ourselves  and  rise  in 
the  scale  of  being. 

But  all  its  nobler  uses  are  conditioned  upon  dis- 
cipline; that  is,  upon  its  working  in  harness  with  the 
other  above-mentioned  factors.  These  two,  labouring 
on  either  side,  tend  to  keep  it  in  order  while  it,  in  turn, 
sends  a  current  of  life  and  inspiration  through  them, 
making  the  movement  toward  knowledge,  notwith- 
standing its  drudgery  and  set-backs,  an  experience> 
on  the  whole,  of  joy  and  ever-increasing  delight. 

I  am  not  saying  that  we  always  consciously  apply 
these  three  forms  of  activity  in  our  conduct  of  life. 
Instinct  goes  before  understanding.  Even  after  we 
have  accustomed  ourselves  to  reflection,  we  employ 
the  three-fold  process  as  if  it  were  no  process  at  all, 
and  call  it  sympathy,  intuition,  divination.  And 
when,  perchance,  we  do  turn  our  attention  to  the 
nature  of  our  methods  and  processes,  we  find  these 
activities  already  functioning  in  perfect  order.  Every 
time  we  encounter  an  object  that  is  somewhat  strange, 
and  make  an  effort  to  assimilate  the  new  experience 
to  the  established  society  of  our  accepted  beliefs,  we 
go  through  all  the  three  stages.  The  perception  of 
it  arouses  curiosity  and  the  question,  what  is  it? 
Instinctively  we  call  before  us  resemblances  that  may 
suggest  a  partial  answer.  This  leads  to  a  guess  or 
hypothesis  as  to  its  nature;  and  then,  if  we  are  per- 


APPENDIX  A  313 

mitted,  we  proceed  to  test  the  correctness  of  it  by 
the  sense  of  touch,  or  smell,  or  taste.  The  continued 
use  of  this  process  underlies  all  our  organized  knowl- 
edge. Even  that  which  seems  the  most  directly 
given  is,  in  reality,  the  product  of  its  employment. 

To  use  Mr.  G.  H.  Lewes'  expression,  every  new  idea 
must  be  soluble  in  old  experiences,  be  recognized  as 
like  them;  otherwise  it  will  be  unperceived,  uncompre- 
hended.  A  conception  which  is  novel,  or  largely 
novel,  is  unintelligible  even  to  the  acutest  intellect, 
It  must  be  prepared  for,  pre-conceived;  and,  by  the 
exhibition  of  its  points  of  similarity  and  attachment 
with  familiar  conceptions,  its  congruity  with  these, 
may  become  the  ground  of  its  acceptance."* 

Except  for  our  own  self-consciousness  we  could 
know  nothing  whatever  of  self-consciousness  or  intel- 
ligence in  others;  and,  beyond  the  instinctive  stage, 
our  progressive  knowledge  of  them  is  attained,  first, 
by  a  series  of  analogical  assumptions,  or  hypotheses, 
which  may  properly  be  described  as  prejudices;  and, 
second,  by  the  verification  or  correction  of  these 
by  further  experience.  Certain  general  conclusions 
with  regard  to  mankind  result  from  this.  First,  that 
all  members  of  the  human  race  are  like  ourselves 
and  like  each  other;  second,  that  no  two  members 
of  the  race  are  like  each  other;  and  third,  that  the 
least  developed  can  have  only  a  very  limited  and  im- 
perfect knowledge  of  the  most  developed.  In  other 
words,  experience  endorses  our  use  of  self-knowledge 
as  the  ground  of  interpretation  for  conscious  beings 
widely  separated  from  us,  but,  at  the  same  time, 
lays  upon  us  the  necessity  of  allowing  for  wide,  blank 

*  "Mind  as  a  function  of  the  Organism."     Sec.  77. 


314  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

spaces  in  our  conception.  The  more  closely  connected 
two  persons  are  by  birth,  training,  and  temperament, 
the  fewer  the  blank  spaces,  the  more  complete  and 
trustworthy  the  conception  formed.  Yet  those  who 
are  most  widely  separated  find,  in  virtue  of  their 
common  humanity,  grounds  for  a  fairly  probable 
judgment  of  character. 

But  this  is  only  the  beginning  of  the  analogical  use 
to  which  we  put  our  inner  knowledge  of  self.  All  our 
interpretation  of  the  motives  of  the  lower  animals 
proceeds  upon  the  same  principle  as  our  interpreta- 
tion of  men.  In  our  critical  moments  we  may  be 
inclined  to  deny  that  a  shepherd-dog  has  any  commun- 
ity of  nature  with  man.  But  in  the  synthetical,  prac- 
tical judgments  of  his  shepherd-master  he  figures  as 
a  slightly  modified  human  being.  I  think  I  may  affirm 
that  our  success  in  dealing  with  the  more  intelligent 
animals  depends  upon  the  faithfulness  and  discrimi- 
nation with  which  we  apply  this  self-derived  analogy. 
"Put  yourself  in  his  place"  is,  within  certain  limits,  as 
good  a  maxim  for  the  regulation  of  our  conduct 
toward  a  horse  as  toward  a  man. 

From  the  more  intelligent  animals  we  descend  by 
regular  gradations  till  we  reach  those  that  are  lowest  in 
the  scale  of  organization.  The  structure  of  the  appar- 
ently brainless  ant,  with  its  plurality  of  co-ordinate 
nerve  centres,  seems  at  far  too  great  a  remove  from 
the  human  organism  to  afford  the  slightest  ground 
for  a  trustworthy  analogy.  But  when  we  study  its 
adaptations  and  modifications  of  means  to  ends,  we 
are,  in  spite  of  our  knowledge  of  structure,  convinced 
that  ants  not  only  have  something  closely  resembling 
intelligence,  but  that  they  have  an  amazing  amount 
of  it.  And  when  we  drop  still  lower  to  contemplate 


APPENDIX   A  315 

the"  behaviour  of  the  apparently  structureless  amoeba 
in  search  of  its  food,  we  are  constrained  to  apply  the 
same  analogy  for  the  explanation  of  what  we  behold. 
The  inferences  we  draw  are  crude,  and  perhaps  in 
many  respects  wide  of  the  truth,  but  it  guides  us  to- 
ward the  truth,  and  is  the  germ  of  our  conception  of 
instinct. 

Now,  with  regard  to  the  threefold  process,  here 
are  certain  facts;  this  process  is  embedded  in  our 
nature,  we  find  it  in  operation  before  we  reach  the 
stage  of  analyzing  our  mental  processes,  we  have  dis- 
covered no  substitute  for  it  in  the  conduct  of  daily 
life.  These  considerations  are  to  my  mind  the  strong- 
est possible  justification  for  the  belief  that  this  three- 
fold method  is  the  one  by  which  all  our  constructive 
knowledge  is  to  be  acquired.  This  is  my  hypothesis; 
and  for  its  endorsement  I  must  make  inquiry  of  the 
various  departments  of  human  knowledge  that  have 
most  grown  and  prospered,  to  find  out  how  it  has 
been  with  them.  Have  they  found  another  method 
more  reliable  or  shorter  or,  in  general,  more  satisfac- 
tory? The  physical  sciences,  for  instance,  have  they 
invented  a  better  way?  On  the  contrary,  all  their 
triumphs  in  the  past  have  sprung  from  the  use  of 
the  three-stage  method  and  all  their  hope  for  the 
future  is  vested  in  it. 


II 

Up  to  a  certain  point  the  labour  of  science  consists 
in  observation,  in  prying  research  for  the  collection 
of  a  great  number  of  facts;  then  comes  the  work  of 
comparison  and  classification;  then  the  work  of  con- 
jecture, in  which  the  imagination  has  free  play;  then 


316  GOD    IN    EVOLUTION 

the  process  of  exclusion,  in  the  course  of  which  many 
of  the  suggestions  of  fancy  are  set  aside  as  unworthy 
of  attention;  then  the  process  of  verification  for  the 
proof,  or  disproof,  of  the  surviving  conjecture.  We 
are  at  present  interested  in  that  stage  that  relates  to 
the  formation  of  hypotheses. 

The  scientific  imagination  is,  from  the  first,  held  in 
partial  control  by  past  experiences,  which,  at  the  same 
time,  restrain  and  furnish  it  with  building  material  in 
the  shape  of  resemblances.  Guided  by  these,  it  con- 
structs an  hypothetical  explanation  of  a  given  group 
of  phenomena;  that  is,  it  finds  an  analogy.  Having, 
with  the  aid  of  this,  ascertained  a  principle  of  limited 
range,  it  expands  this  again  by  the  use  of  the  imagi- 
nation, till  the  same  principle  is  serviceable  for  a  very 
much  wider  class  of  phenomena.  Every  time  it 
repeats  this  process  it  acts  on  the  assumption  that 
the  world  is  a  series  of  modified  repetitions:  and 
every  time  an  hypothesis  so  made  is  verified,  the 
correctness  of  this  assumption  receives  an  additional 
proof. 

The  results  of  science  thus  present  us  with  what 
has  been  appropriately  called  a  "hierarchy  of  prin- 
ciples." Each  partial  generalization  foreshadows  a 
higher  one  hi  which  it  is,  soon  or  late,  seen  to  be 
comprehended.  And  what  is  true  of  principles  is 
equally  true  of  groups  of  phenomena.  The  whole 
science  of  classification  depends  upon  the  fact  of  rep- 
etition, with  modification,  on  different  scales. 

Comparatively  recent  discoveries  have  disclosed 
the  existence  of  such  orderly  arrangements  on  differ- 
ent planes  where  we  should  least  have  suspected  it. 
Chemistry,  as  we  know,  is  arrested  in  its  all-dissolving 
course  by  certain  elements  that  seem  to  defy  analy- 


APPENDIX  A  317 

sis,  —  elements  that  have  therefore  to  be  provision- 
ally treated  as  final,  absolutely  dissimilar  substances. 
Here,  if  anywhere,  we  should  anticipate  that  the 
above-mentioned  rule  would  fail  us.  But,  almost 
simultaneously  by  a  Russian  and  a  German  chemist, 
the  very  remarkable  discovery  was  made  that  these 
elements  are  capable  of  being  classified  in  successive 
series. 

The  following  very  brief  and  clear  statement  of 
this  was  given  some  years  ago  by  Professor  Huxley: 
—  "If  the  sixty-five  or  sixty-eight  recognized  elements 
are  arranged  in  the  order  of  their  atomic  weights, 
the  series  does  not  exhibit  one  continuous,  progres- 
sive modification  in  the  physical  and  chemical  charac- 
ters of  its  several  terms,  but  breaks  up  into  a  number 
of  sections,  in  each  of  which  the  several  terms  present 
analogies  with  the  corresponding  terms  of  the  other 
series.  Thus  the  whole  series  does  not  run  — 

a,  b,  c,  d,  e,  f,  g,  h,  i,  j,  k,  etc. 
but 

a,  b,  c,  d,  —  A,  B,  C,  D,  —  a,  ft  y,  8,  etc. 

So  that,  it  is  said  to  express  a  law  of  recurrent  sim- 
ilarities. Or  the  relation  may  be  expressed  in  another 
way.  In  each  section  of  the  series  the  atomic  weight 
is  greater  than  in  the  preceding  section;  so  that  if 
w  is  the  atomic  weight  of  any  element  in  the  first 
segment,  w  +  x  will  represent  the  atomic  weight  of 
any  element  in  the  next,  and  w  -f  x  +  y  the  atomic 
weight  of  any  element  in  the  next,  and  so  on.  There- 
fore the  sections  may  be  represented  as  parallel  series, 
the  corresponding  terms  of  which  have  analogous 
properties;  each  successive  series  starting  with  a 
body  the  atomic  weight  of  which  is  greater  than 


318  GOD    IN   EVOLUTION 

that  of  any  in  the  preceding  series,  in  the  following 

fashion :  — 

d                     D  8 

C  y 

b                    B  ft 

a                     A  a 

w                 w  +  x  w  +  x  +  y 

This  is  a  conception  with  which  biologists  are  very 
familiar;  animal  and  plant  groups  constantly  appear- 
ing as  series  of  parallel  modifications  of  similar  and 
yet  different  primary  forms."  * 

The  discovery  of  this  order  led  the  Russian  chemist, 
Mendelejeff,  to  indicate  the  existence  of  other  ele- 
ments not  hitherto  recognized.  When  he  first  ranged 
the  known  elements  in  a  tabular  form  he  found  that 
a  symmetrical  arrangement  left,  here  and  there,  vacant 
spaces.  He  called  attention  to  these  gaps,  and  ven- 
tured not  only  to  prophesy  that  elements,  then  un- 
known, would  be  found  to  fill  them,  but  even  went  so 
far  as  to  describe  in  detail  what  these  undiscovered 
elements  would  probably  be  like.  Only  a  short  time 
elapsed  before  the  elements  thus  described  were  dis- 
covered. 

Other  illustrations  of  this  principle,  having  a  closer 
relation  to  our  problem,  will  easily  occur  to  the  reader. 
If  we  wish  to  find  an  analogy  for  the  assumption 
that  the  exceedingly  limited  may  reveal  the  nature 
of  that  which  is  inexpressibly  extended,  we  have  only 
to  call  to  mind  the  great  law  of  Newton,  —  that  every 
particle  of  matter  in  the  universe  is  related  to  every 
other  particle  as  each  of  the  planets  is  related  to  the 

*  "The  Advance  of  Science  in  the  Last  Half  Century,"  p.  56. 


APPENDIX   A  319 

other  heavenly  bodies.  Following  out  this  law,  in  con- 
nection with  the  atomic  theory,  we  attain  to  that 
astounding  conception  for  which  science  has  no  rebuke, 
that  a  molecule  may  be  a  solar  system  in  miniature. 
Alluding  to  such  a  conception,  Professor  J.  P.  Cooke 
says:  "  A  theory  which  assumes  that  within  the  masses 
of  material  bodies  the  motions  of  suns  and  systems 
are  reproduced  on  a  scale  so  minute  as  to  task  our 
power  of  imagination  to  grasp  the  conception,  is  found 
to  be  in  complete  accordance  with  all  the  facts  which 
can  be  observed."  * 

But  there  is  another  aspect  of  our  hypothesis  that 
needs  illustration.  The  simplicity  of  the  relations 
above  instanced  may  seem  to  separate  them  by  a 
wide  difference  from  the  relations  postulated  for  the 
interpretation  of  the  inner  reality  of  living  things. 
But  even  here  we  are  not  without  a  precedent  in 
the  methods  of  science.  The  marvel  of  marvels  for 
condensed  potentiality  is  the  egg.  For  in  it,  by  the 
aid  of  the  microscope,  we  may  trace  the  whole  pro- 
cess of  the  creation  of  a  higher  animal.  First  we 
have  the  germ,  a  nucleated  cell.  This  becomes  two 
by  a  division  of  itself  and  by  growth.  By  the  repeti- 
tion of  this  process  it  becomes  a  multitude.  The  egg 
then  presents  to  us  an  aggregate  of  homogeneous 
cells,  capable  of  being  still  further  multiplied  and,  at 
the  same  time,  modified  into  a  great  variety  of 
classes  having  different  forms  and  functions.  By 
these,  as  by  a  trained  army  of  artisans,  each  knowing 
just  when  to  go  and  what  to  do,  the  living  organism, 
that  in  its  unity  we  call  a  being,  is  built  up. 

Now,   in   this   wonderful   process,    modern   science 

*  "The  Credentials  of  Science  the  Warrant  of  Faith,"  p.  265. 


320  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

believes  that  it  has  discovered  the  true  key  to  the 
history  of  the  whole  animated  world.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  his  book  on  evolution,  Dr.  Joseph  Le  Conte 
says:  " Every  one  is  familiar  with  the  main  facts  con- 
nected with  the  development  of  an  egg.  .  .  .  Now 
this  process  is  evolution.  It  is  more,  —  it  is  the  type 
of  all  evolution.  It  is  that  from  which  we  get  our 
idea  of  evolution,  and  without  which  there  would 
be  no  such  word."  As  to  the  importance  of  the 
principle  thus  made  known  to  us,  the  same  writer 
says:  —  "The  process  pervades  the  whole  universe, 
and  the  doctrine  concerns  every  department  of 
science,  —  yea,  every  department  of  human  thought. 
It  is  literally  one-half  of  all  science." 

Ill 

Now  let  us  see  to  what  extent  this  important  prin- 
ciple, suggested  by  the  egg,  rests  upon  analogy.  It 
has  been  reached  by  the  comparison  of  three  separate 
series  of  forms  found  in  nature.  First  we  have  the 
taxonomic  series.  This  is  the  result  of  classifying  the 
contemporary  forms  of  animal  life  on  a  scale  of  rela- 
tive complexity.  Beginning  with  a  unicellular  organ- 
ism, we  advance,  step  by  step,  till  we  reach  the  higher 
animals,  made  up  of  innumerable  cells  having  a  great 
variety  of  forms,  functions,  and  relations.  The  mem- 
bers of  this  series  are  not  a  succession  of  stages  pro- 
ceeding one  from  another,  but  a  series  of  completed, 
independent  existences  living  alongside  of  each  other. 

The  second  series  is  the  phylogenetic,  or  geological, 
series.  This  seems  to  be  the  history  in  time,  of  the 
former.  It  shows  that  the  simplest  organisms  came 
into  being  first,  then  those  somewhat  less  simple,  and 


APPENDIX   A  321 

then,  successively,  those  which  were  more  and  more 
complex.  The  members  of  this  series  do  not  appear 
to  be  genetically  related  to  each  other,  any  more  than 
those  of  the  first  series,  but  the  arrangement  of  their 
succession  in  time  gives  us  the  idea  of  a  progres- 
sive creation.  But  now  we  come  to  the  third,  the 
ontogenetic,  or  egg,  series. 

For  the  purpose  of  comparison,  the  process  that 
takes  place  in  the  egg  is  marked  off  into  a  succes- 
sion of  stages;  and  the  relations  which  these  stages 
sustain  to  each  other  seem  to  reveal  in  a  wonderful 
manner  the  secret  of  the  other  two  series.  Like  the 
taxonomic  series,  it  begins  with  a  single  cell,  and  then, 
by  the  gradual  multiplication  and  differentiation  of 
cells,  it  reaches  that  unified  complex  of  organs  —  a 
higher  animal.  In  this  series  all  the  members  are  gen- 
etically related,  that  is,  they  are  stages  of  being  that 
proceed  directly  the  one  from  the  other. 

This  seems  to  explain  the  geological,  or  historical, 
series,  because  its  members  are  similarly  related  to 
each  other,  both  in  the  order  of  time  and  in  the  order 
of  complexity.  And  it  seems  to  explain  the  classi- 
fication series,  and  to  unite  this  with  the  historical, 
by  showing  how  a  series  that  has  been  progressive  hi 
time  may,  in  its  results,  present  the  aspect  of  an  aggre- 
gate of  unprogressive,  fixed  forms.  For  the  egg 
series,  although  progressive,  gives  rise  all  along  its 
course,  to  forms  that  remain  as  immovably  fixed  as 
the  different  species  of  animals  that  we  see  around 
us.  Different  classes  of  cells,  as  we  have  seen,  are 
evolved;  and  although  some  of  these  give  rise  to  new 
classes,  some  of  them  remain  to  represent  the  partic- 
ular phase  of  the  organism  that  they  introduced. 
The  same  is  true  of  organized  groups  of  cells.  There 
21 


322  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

is  a  continual  branching  and  re-branching.  But,  in 
the  completed  organism,  the  various  stages  of  differ- 
entiation continue  to  be  more  or  less  represented  by 
classifiable  cells  and  groups  of  cells. 

More  remarkable  still  do  these  coincidences  appear 
when  it  is  further  observed  that  the  earlier  stages  of 
the  egg  series  of  a  higher  animal  bear  a  striking  resem- 
blance to  the  more  mature  stages  of  lower  animals. 
This  is  perhaps  most  clearly  illustrated  by  a  compari- 
son of  the  successive  embryonic  stages  of  the  human 
brain  with  the  mature  brain  of  animals  lower  in  the 
scale.  The  first  observable  form  is  less  elaborate  than 
that  of  the  ordinary  fish.  In  the  next  stage  it  resembles 
that  of  a  fish;  then,  by  the  relative  increase  of  the 
cerebrum,  it  reaches  the  reptilian  stage;  by  continued 
growth  it  partly  covers  the  optic  lobes  and  resembles 
the  brain  of  a  bird;  then  it  wholly  covers  the  optic 
lobes  and,  partially  overspreading  the  cerebellum  and 
the  olfactory  lobes,  may  be  called  a  mammalian  brain; 
and  finally  it  covers  and  overhangs  all  and  becomes 
a  human  brain.  In  view  of  these  facts,  Dr.  Le  Conte 
sums  up  the  argument  for  evolution  as  follows :  — 

"Now,  why  should  this  peculiar  order  be  observed 
in  the  building  of  the  individual  brain?  We  find  the 
answer — the  only  conceivable  answer — to  this  question 
in  the  fact  that  this  is  the  order  of  the  vertebrate 
brain  by  evolution  throughout  geological  history. 
We  have  already  seen  that  fishes  were  the  only  verte- 
brates living  in  Devonian  times.  The  first  form  of 
brain,  therefore,  was  that  characteristic  of  that  class. 
The  reptiles  were  introduced;  then  birds  and  mar- 
supials; then  true  mammals;  and,  lastly,  man.  The 
different  styles  of  brain  characteristic  of  these  classes 
were,  therefore,  successively  made  by  evolution  from 


APPENDIX   A  323 

earlier  and  simpler  forms.  In  phylogeny,  this  order 
was  observed  because  these  successive  forms  were 
necessary  for  perfect  adaptation  to  the  environment 
at  each  step.  In  taxonemy  we  find  the  same  order, 
because,  as  already  explained,  every  stage  in  advance 
in  phylogeny  is  still  represented  in  existing  forms. 
In  ontogeny  we  have  still  the  same  order,  because 
ancestral  characteristics  are  inherited  and  family 
history  recapitulated  in  the  individual  history."  * 

When  presented  in  this  form,  the  reasoning  that 
connects  the  egg  series  with  the  other  two  does  not, 
at  first  sight,  seem  to  rest  altogether  upon  analogy. 
But  a  close  inspection  of  the  argument  will,  I  think, 
convince  us  that  it  has  very  little  else  to  support  it. 
The  order  of  the  thought  seems  to  be  this:  first  we 
compare  the  three  series  and  find  a  close  resemblance 
in  the  succession  of  their  stages;  second,  knowing 
that  the  stages  in  the  egg  series  are  genetically  related 
to  each  other,  we  infer  that  those  of  the  geological 
series  are  similarly  related ;  third,  by  a  reflex  argument, 
we  infer  that  the  reason  why  the  members  of  the 
egg  series  are  genetically  related  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  those  of  the  geological  series  were,  previously, 
so  related. 

Now,  aside  from  analogy,  what  support  do  we  get 
for  the  first  inference?  If  investigation  showed  that 
similar  conditions  affected  the  two  series,  we  could 
at  once  establish  our  inference  on  the  principle  that 
like  causes  produce  like  effects.  But  this  is  not  the 
case.  The  conditions  in  the  one  situation  have  no 
resemblance  to  the  conditions  in  the  other;  at  least 
they  have  no  resemblance  to  the  conditions  that  are 

*  "Evolution  and  its  Relations  to  Religious  Thought," 
p.  150. 


324  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

adduced  as  the  chief  cause  of  the  original  order.  Con- 
flict with,  and  adaptation  to,  environment  are  said  to 
have  had  a  large  share  in  the  origination  of  the  race 
series.  But  the  environment  of  the  individual  em- 
bryo is,  in  every  respect,  unlike  that  of  the  unpro- 
tected militant  organism.  In  reasoning  from  the  egg 
series  to  the  geological,  therefore,  we  have  nothing  to 
go  upon  but  analogy;  that  is,  a  similarity  of  order 
existing  under  external  circumstances  that  are  quite 
dissimilar. 

Let  us  examine  the  second  step.  Having  analog- 
ically made  the  hypothesis  that  the  members  of  the 
geological  series  are  genetically  related,  how  are  we 
justified  in  assigning  this  as  the  cause  of  the  phenom- 
ena of  the  egg  series?  It  is  said  that  the  principle 
of  heredity  supplies  us  with  the  means  of  making  such 
a  deduction.  But  we  must  further  ask,  to  what  ex- 
tent does  the  principle  of  heredity,  as  thus  applied, 
rest  upon  inference  from  analogy?  The  answer  must 
be,  almost  entirely.  We  know  nothing  about  the 
principle  of  heredity,  as  related  to  the  remote  past, 
except  inferentially  and  analogically.  So  far  as  direct 
knowledge  of  the  law  of  heredity  is  concerned,  it 
remains  such  a  mystery  from  beginning  to  end,  as 
to  make  the  exclusion  of  almost  any  hypothesis 
impossible. 

But  the  same  ignorance  of  its  laws  makes  it  impos- 
sible to  deduce  results  with  any  confidence  from  it. 
The  analogies  under  discussion  have  contributed 
many  suggestions  about  the  law  of  heredity ;  but  from 
the  law  of  heredity,  independently  of  these  analogies, 
we  get  very  little  assistance. 

The  elder  Agassiz,  who  did  so  much  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  evolution  hypothesis,  brought  to- 


APPENDIX  A  325 

gether  and  classified  the  materials  in  all  three  of  the 
above-mentioned  series,  and,  moreover,  made  it  the 
great  work  of  his  life  to  demonstrate  the  close  rela- 
tionship in  which  they  stood  to  each  other.  He  even 
went  so  far  as  to  affirm  that  the  observed  repetitions 
were  such  as  to  render  the  embryonic  series  a  true  key 
to  classification  in  the  other  two.  But  he  did  not 
advance  to  the  position  that  species  are  derived  from 
each  other  by  natural  descent,  because  there  was 
nothing  in  the  known  principles  of  heredity  to  compel 
such  an  inference.  The  connection  between  the  three 
series  was,  for  him,  one  that  had  its  origin  in  the 
mind  of  the  Creator.  There  was  a  uniformity  of  plan 
and  method,  but  not  an  interdependence  between  the 
series,  or  a  derivation  of  one  from  the  other. 

In  short,  it  seems  to  me  unquestionable  that,  in 
so  far  as  the  modern  theory  of  evolution  gains  support 
from  embryology,  it  is  indebted  entirely  to  analogi- 
cal relations  existing  on  widely  different  scales,  and 
under  circumstances  that  seem  to  be  wholly  unlike 
each  other.  I  am  not,  be  it  understood,  attempting 
to  disparage  the  argument  thus  derived.  I  wish  only 
to  show  how  much  influence  analogy  has  in  deter- 
mining our  beliefs;  and  to  what  an  extent  the  most 
complex  relations  may  be  employed  as  a  key  to  the 
understanding  of  other  complex  relations  from  which 
they  are  widely  separated.  Nor,  on  the  other  hand, 
am  I  trying  to  make  it  appear  that  the  analogical 
argument  is  the  only  one  to  which  the  hypothesis  of 
evolution  refers  for  support. 

When  once  the  hint  of  a  genealogical  relationship 
between  species  had  been  furnished  by  the  egg  series, 
scientific  research  busied  itself  to  find  corroborations 
of  this  hint  in  other  and  widely  different  relations 


326  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

of  things;  and  although  this  research  failed  to  discover 
much  that  it  expected  to  find,  and  found  in  many  cases 
that  which  seemed,  at  first  sight,  the  contradiction 
of  the  hypothesis  it  was  trying  to  verify,  yet,  so  many 
and  weighty  were  the  converging  evidences  in  its  favour 
that  evolution  was  tentatively  established. 

IV 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  consideration  of  that  most 
significant  of  all  analogies,  very  old,  very  time-worn, 
the  conception  that  is  easily  taken  hold  of  by  chil- 
dren, and  to  which  the  greatest  intellects  of  the  world 
have  bowed  in  reverence;  but  which,  from  an  intel- 
lectual point  of  view,  has  always  been  beset  with  dif- 
ficulties. A  pragmatic  theology  undertakes  the 
removal,  to  some  extent,  of  these  difficulties.  It  sets 
itself  the  task  of  showing  that  the  hypothesis  of  an 
indwelling  intelligence,  working  and  creating  in  the 
great  world  somewhat  as  man,  the  energizer  and  cre- 
ator, works  in  his  little  world,  is  a  conception  that 
stands  endorsed  by  the  scientific  method. 

In  pursuance  of  this  end  I  will  ask  the  atten- 
tion of  the  reader  to  a  very  remarkable  and  instruc- 
tive parallel  existing  between  the  evidential  process 
that  has  led  to  the  establishment  of  the  doctrine  of 
evolution,  and  that  which  has  been  the  progressive 
endorsement  of  the  doctrine  of  an  indwelling  God. 

In  both  cases  we  have  a  trio  of  related  series.  And 
furthermore  in  both  cases,  one  of  the  series,  that 
which  mediates  between  the  other  two,  is  composed  of 
forms  made  known  to  us  by  modern  scientific  research. 
In  the  series  that  leads  to  evolution,  the  two  presented 
to  ordinary  observation  are,  first,  the  geological,  and 


APPENDIX   A  327 

second,  the  series  of  contemporary  species.  In  the 
series  that  leads  to  theism,  the  two  that  correspond 
to  these  are,  first,  the  one  made  known  to  us  in  the 
history  of  man's  creative  activities,  which  we  may 
call  the  human  series,  and  second,  the  one  exhibited 
on  a  broader  scale  in  the  history  of  the  greater 
creation,  which  we  may  call  the  divine  series.  Both 
these  two  series  have  had  to  wait  the  advent 
of  the  third  for  a  satisfactory  interpretation.  By 
themselves  they  suggested  analogical  resemblances 
and  gave  rise  to  hypotheses;  but  only  when  the  third, 
mediating  series  was  made  known  to  us  could  these  be 
scientifically  endorsed.  We  have  seen  how  the  infer- 
ence of  genetic  relationship  derived  from  the  geolog- 
ical series  was  vetoed  by  the  stability  and  genetic 
separateness  of  the  series  of  contemporary  forms. 

Just  so,  in  the  attempt  to  apply  the  analogy  between 
what  we  have  called  the  human  and  divine  series, 
contrarieties  of  thought  arose.  Two  distinct  aspects 
of  the  human  series  as  related  to  its  centre  emerged 
and  divided  the  attention.  On  the  one  hand  was  the 
relation  sustained  by  the  individual  to  its  completed 
products,  which  had  become  altogether  separated  from 
their  author;  on  the  other  hand  the  relations  sustained 
by  the  individual  to  its  not-yet-finished  products. 
The  former  tallied  with  the  idea  of  a  transcendent 
God,  quite  separated  from  his  creatures,  the  latter 
to  the  conception  of  an  indwelling  continuously  creat- 
ing God,  with  whose  existence  that  of  the  creature 
was  vitally  bound  up.  To  this  latter  class  belong  all 
the  constructions  of  man  that  are  still  in  the  for- 
mative process :  —  the  unpainted  or  half-painted  pic- 
ture, the  statue  in  the  clay,  the  unrealized  invention, 
the  partially  written  book.  The  application  of  thig 


328  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

analogy  presents  every  human  being  as  a  thought  of 
God  in  the  making,  a  creature  of  God  only  half 
realized. 

But  this  most  fruitful  and,  in  some  respects,  help- 
ful conception  encountered  serious  contradictions  in 
experience;  for  it  took  no  account  of  man's  freedom 
and  responsibility.  It  seemed  to  obliterate  the  very 
fact  in  which  the  analogy  took  its  rise,  namely,  the 
reality  of  man  as  an  originating,  creative  centre. 
Taken  by  itself,  its  logical  outcome  was  pantheism 
and  determinism.  Thus  our  analogy,  that  seemed  so 
attractive  and  helpful  in  the  beginning,  proved  most 
disappointing.  If  we  followed  it  out  on  the  line  of 
completed  products  to  a  transcendent  God,  we  had 
to  think  of  ourselves  as  finished  and  dismissed,  cut 
off  from  all  vital  connection  with  the  Author  of 
our  being.  But,  if  we  took  the  other  horn  of  the 
dilemma,  we  found  ourselves  at  odds  with  the  most 
vital  reality  of  our  existence. 

But  now  we  come  to  the  third  series,  which  is  the 
key  to  the  other  two.  We  may  call  it  the  organic, 
because  it  presents  the  human  organism  to  us  in  the 
two-fold  aspect  of  a  unity  and  a  multiplicity.  The 
unity  is  the  familiar,  significant  fact  of  experience  — 
the  Ego.  The  multiplicity  is  the  human  body  as 
known  to  science.  The  following  statement  of  it  is 
by  Dr.  Evald  Hering:  —  "Millions  of  the  minutest, 
separately  existing  beings,  different  in  shape  and  ex- 
ternal structure,  compose  a  systematically  arranged 
aggregate,  thus  forming  the  diverse  organs;  and  these 
beings,  in  spite  of  their  complicated  interdependence, 
lead  quite  separate  lives,  for  each  single  being  is  an 
animated  centre  of  activity.  The  human  body  does 
not  receive  the  impulse  of  life,  like  a  machine,  from 


APPENDIX  A  329 

one  point,  but  each  single  atom  of  the  different  organs 
bears  its  vitalizing  power  in  itself."  * 

Each  of  these  living-beings,  known  to  science  as 
a  cell,  consists  of  a  protoplasmic  body  and  a  nucleus 
that,  somehow,  exerts  an  influence  over  it;  and  there 
is  that  in  the  behaviour  of  the  nerve-cell  that  strongly 
suggests  the  most  distinctive  characteristic  of  mind, 
that  is,  self-control.  A  normal  cell  when  stimulated 
does  not  re-act  to  exhaustion,  but  responds  by  meas- 
ure. Just  as  a  person  chooses  to  be  more  or  less  indif- 
ferent to  one  set  of  influences  while  responding  freely 
to  another,  so  also  it  seems  to  be  with  nerve-cells. 
This  power  of  inhibition,  as  it  is  called,  differs  in  cells 
and  groups  of  cells  as  much  as  persons  differ  in  tem- 
perament, and  there  is  every  indication  that  it  is  a 
phenomenon  of  exactly  the  same  nature  as  that  which 
convinces  us  that  we  are,  to  a  certain  extent,  respon- 
sible beings. 

And  again,  according  to  their  special  functions,  the 
individual  cells  are  organized  in  such  manner  that  each 
group  presents  something  the  same  aspect  of  unity 
in  diversity  that  characterizes  the  larger  organism. 
The  individuals  that  have  to  do  with  the  sense  of 
hearing  are  organized  in  a  system  by  themselves. 
Those  that  serve  the  sense  of  sight  form  another  sys- 
tem; and  those  that  serve  the  sense  of  touch,  still 
another.  So  also  those  bodily  functions  that  are 
less  closely  related  to  our  consciousness:  the  beating 
of  the  heart,  the  movements  of  the  lungs,  and  other 
complicated  activities  of  the  organism  which  we  call 
automatic.  And,  somehow,  there  is  a  unity  of  action 
in  each  system,  —  a  co-ordination,  by  means  of  which 

*  An  Address  on  the  "  Specific  Energies  of  the  Nervous 
System,"  Dec.,  1887. 


330  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

the  activities  of  a  diversified  multitude  are  combined 
for  the  achievement  of  definite  ends. 

The  substantiation  of  these  facts  stands  out  before 
us  as  the  concrete,  living  endorsement  of  the  two  anti- 
thetical conceptions  of  God,  which  we  have  hitherto 
held  against  the  protest  of  logical  consistency.  With 
the  discovery  of  an  adequate  symbol  for  the  major 
premise,  the  protest  vanishes.  Logic  is  with  us.  The 
indefeasible  fact  of  an  independent  unity  and  mul- 
tiplicity, existing  in  one  being,  takes  these  two  aspects 
of  God,  that  have  been  associated  without  union, 
and  compacts  them  into  one  substance  of  unquestion- 
able truth.  We  have  in  this  fact  a  demonstration 
that  may  be  likened  to  a  chemical  reaction  when  the 
particles  of  elements  quite  foreign  to  each  other  lock 
together  in  the  formation  of  a  new  substance.  We 
cannot  at  once  realize  how  important  a  factor 
in  the  theology  of  the  future  this  third  series  must 
be.  It  cannot  but  classify  our  fundamental  concep- 
tions of  God,  and  rectify  our  thoughts  of  Him  in  many 
of  life's  relations.  Let  us  glance  at  some  of  its  more 
immediate  effects. 

Why,  let  us  ask,  is  it  that  one  side  of  our  thought 
of  God  appeals  to  us  as  the  practical,  and  the  other 
as  the  mystical,  somewhat  unreal  side?  The  belief 
that  God  works  in  and  through  man  is  a  vital  and  fun- 
damental part  of  our  theology.  Our  knowledge  of 
God  that  comes  to  us  through  the  prophets,  all  that 
comes  through  the  Incarnation,  all  that  comes 
through  conscience,  grounds  its  claims  upon  the 
truth  of  this  view.  The  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  that 
works  with  our  spirit,  that  inspires,  guides,  and 
regenerates  men,  owns  the  same  origin;  and  it  is  a 
part  of  our  religion  upon  which  we  wish  to  take 


APPENDIX   A  331 

a  very  strong  hold,  which  ought  to  be  exceedingly 
real  to  us.  But  does  it  not  stand  in  the  thought 
of  most  of  us  as  a  cloudy,  unsubstantial,  theoretical 
kind  of  belief?  Is  it  not  a  view  of  things  that 
impresses  us  deeply  in  hours  of  meditation,  but 
which  slips  away  when  we  come  back  to  the  things 
of  earth?  Are  we  not  dogged  by  a  sense  of  incon- 
sistency and  paradox  in  view  of  all  our  anxious 
forecastings  of  the  future,  our  carefully  laid  plans, 
and  our  cautious  exploration  of  our  way  through 
the  world?  And  do  not  these  strivings  sometimes 
present  themselves  to  us  as  a  practical  surrender  of 
our  religious  beliefs? 

If  I  mistake  not,  the  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  is  vague 
because  it  has  always  appealed  to  us  as  an  abstract, 
unrestricted  principle.  The  divine  efficiency  in  its 
relation  to  human  efficiency  has  nowhere  been  pre- 
sented to  us  in  the  terms  of  a  real  symbol.  It  could 
not  be  so  presented;  because,  until  science  had  inter- 
vened, we  knew  nothing  about  the  individuality  and 
semi-independence  of  the  subordinate  units  of  an  or- 
ganism; and,  unless  we  emphasize  this,  the  full  value 
of  the  analogy  is  not  apparent.  But,  with  this  em- 
phasis, the  interaction  and  mutual  limitation  of  divine 
and  human  efficiency  find  such  a  clear  and  concrete 
expression  as  to  make  it  impossible  for  the  one  to 
overshadow  the  other  in  our  thought.  Magnify  as 
we  will  the  doctrine  of  the  immanency  of  God,  there 
is  no  tendency  to  the  obscuration  of  man's  personal- 
ity. For  our  symbol  so  regulates  and  restricts  the 
two  truths  as  to  make  them  not  antithetical  but 
complementary. 

That  form  of  enthusiasm  which  enjoins  passivity 
on  the  part  of  man,  in  order  that  the  Spirit  may  have 


332  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

free  course  within  him,  finds  no  encouragement.  It 
is  the  activity  of  the  subordinate  beings  that  furnishes 
the  opportunity  for  the  Supreme  Being  to  work. 
It  is  when  they  are  the  most  earnestly  engaged,  each 
one  according  to  his  special  endowment,  in  working 
out  their  own  salvation,  that  the  higher  power  ener- 
gizes most  effectively  within  them.  Neither,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  it  possible  for  us  to  lose  sight  of  or  under- 
estimate the  agency  of  the  Spirit  in  our  lives.  For 
this,  through  the  medium  of  our  symbol,  is  repre- 
sented by  the  over-ruling,  determining,  constantly 
modifying  action  of  the  Ego. 


Let  us  pass  in  review  some  of  the  relations  existing 
between  the  human  Ego  and  its  subordinate  beings. 

We  may  take  it  for  granted  that  the  primary  inter- 
est of  a  nerve-cell  centres  in  itself;  that  self-preserva- 
tion and  the  discharge  of  natural  activities  command 
the  lion's  share  of  its  attention.  Its  consciousness 
of  other  beings  extends  only  to  those  of  its  own 
kind,  or  of  nearly  related  kinds.  Its  interests  are  cell 
interests.  At  the  same  time,  knowing  what  we  do 
of  the  efficiency  of  the  central  Ego,  we  can  hardly 
doubt  that  its  determinations  are  represented  in  some 
way  in  the  consciousness  of  cells  affected  by  them. 
When  the  attention  of  the  Ego  concentrates  itself 
upon  a  particular  interest,  the  vitality  and  strength 
of  the  organism  is  directed  to  a  special  part  of  the 
brain  or  nervous  system;  and  in  that  part  there  is 
superabundant  life,  activity,  and  growth.  Somehow, 
we  know  not  how,  when  this  concentrated  attention 
is  accompanied  by  constructive  effort  on  the  part  of 


APPENDIX   A  333 

the  Ego,  its  activity  results  in  a  more  or  less  elabor- 
ate organization  of  nerve-cells  corresponding  to  the 
form  of  thought  in  the  Ego. 

In  what  guise  this  organizing  activity  appears  to 
the  agents  of  it  we  shall  never  know.  But  we  may 
reasonably  conjecture  that,  had  they  the  power  of  reflec- 
tion, it  would  seem  to  them  much  as  it  now  seems  to 
us,  when  our  plans  and  strivings  appear  to  be  tribu- 
tary to  larger  ends  than  those  which  we  have  set  before 
us;  that  they  would  have  a  vague  consciousness  of 
a  sphere  more  important  than  that  of  the  individual; 
and  that  in  moments  of  creative  activity  they  might 
conceive  themselves  to  be  inspired. 

We  might  further  illustrate  this  thought  by  refer- 
ring to  the  well-known  power  of  the  Ego  over  the  organ- 
ism for  the  preservation  of  health  and  the  overcoming 
of  disease.  When  all  goes  well  we  say  the  organs  of 
the  body  are  doing  their  work  normally  and  thoroughly; 
and  we  little  think,  perhaps,  how  much  of  this  desir- 
able state  of  things  is  to  be  credited  to  the  confident 
cheerful  attitude  of  the  central  consciousness.  When 
disease  comes,  each  organ  and  cell  has  its  own  way  of 
contending  against  it;  and  if,  when  hard  pressed  in 
the  conflict,  there  comes  a  great  inflow  of  strength, 
it  is  perhaps  that  the  Ego  has  heard  good  news,  has 
found  a  new  interest  in  life,  or  has  thrown  the  whole 
force  of  a  hitherto  unused  will-power  into  the  battle. 

In  all  these  cases  we  have  illustrated  to  us  the 
greatest  mystery  of  being,  —  the  mystery  of  life  within 
life,  of  mind  co-operating  with  mind  organically. 
We  do  not  understand  any  better  than  before  how 
such  interaction  is  accomplished,  nor  how  it  is  pos- 
sible that  a  nerve-cell,  while  leading  a  life  of  its  own, 
should  at  the  same  time  be  the  unconscious  agent  of 


334  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

a  higher  Being  of  whom  it  is  a  part.  But  it  brings 
the  fact,  the  reality,  of  a  similar  relationship  on  a  differ- 
ent scale  within  the  range  of  our  ordinary  experience. 
In  one  sense  it  remains  a  mystery;  but  in  the  same 
sense  all  the  processes  of  nature  are  mysterious.  It 
no  longer  has  that  most  trying  kind  of  mystery  that 
inclines  to  doubt,  —  the  kind  that  must  always  cling 
to  a  fact  that  stands  alone,  that  can,  in  the  wide  uni- 
verse find  no  other  fact  to  which  it  can  be  likened. 

There  is  another  class  of  relations,  not  so  direct 
but  very  intimate,  that  is  capable  of  being  turned  to 
account  in  theology.  The  Ego  is  a  Providence,  both 
general  and  special,  to  its  little  world  of  subjects. 
It  might  seem,  indeed,  almost  as  true  to  say  that  they 
are  a  providence  to  it,  for  it  owes  its  existence  and  de- 
velopment to  their  increase  and  organization;  and  its 
present  state  of  existence  would  cease  except  for  their 
constant  activity  in  the  performance  of  functions 
that  only  they  know  how  to  perform.  But  from  the 
time  that  the  Ego  begins  to  be  conscious  of  itself  as 
an  individual  with  wants  to  be  satisfied  and  interests 
to  protect,  there  begins  also  an  activity  of  the  one 
for  the  welfare  of  the  many. 

The  first  cry  of  the  infant  for  attention  is  a  demand 
of  the  one,  in  response  to  the  inwardly  manifested 
clamours  of  the  multitude  that  have  suddenly  become 
dependent  upon  it.  And  from  this  time  on,  the  des- 
tiny of  the  diverse  beings  that  make  up  the  cosmos  of 
the  human  organism  becomes  more  and  more  depend- 
ent upon  the  intelligence,  the  energy,  and  the  moral- 
ity of  the  Ego.  When  the  Ego  suffers  hunger  or 
thirst,  what  is  it  but  that  its  myriad  subjects  are 
urging  it  with  inarticulate  prayers  to  consider  and 
minister  to  their  wants?  Unless  the  Ego  bestirs  itself 


APPENDIX   A  335 

they  must  starve.  They,  indeed,  are  able  and  willing 
to  work  for  their  living;  but  only  when  they  are 
directed  and  led  by  the  Ego  can  they  work  to  any 
purpose.  It,  the  Ego,  must  be  the  Divinity  that 
shapes  their  ends,  that  combines  and  directs  their 
skill  and  their  energies  in  such  a  way  that  they 
shall  accomplish  the  thing  that  is  required.  And  when 
the  constantly  recurring  wants  of  the  multitude  are 
regularly  met  by  a  bountiful  supply  of  meat  and 
drink,  it  must  seem  to  them  somewhat  as  the  early 
and  the  latter  rain  and  the  timely  sunshine  seem 
to  us. 

Again,  in  view  of  hostile  influences,  the  lives  and 
the  welfare  of  this  great  throng  of  beings  are  largely 
conditioned  upon  the  wisdom  of  their  sovereign  Ego. 
They  depend  implicitly  upon  its  sagacity,  its  vigilance, 
its  courage,  and  its  prudence  to  carry  them  safely 
through  the  innumerable  dangers  that  beset  their 
existence,  —  dangers  which  they  can  neither  foresee 
nor  guard  against.  They  assist,  according  to  their 
several  endowments.  One  great  division  is  organized 
as  a  corps  of  observation,  another  has  been  detailed 
and  specially  trained  to  gather  information  by  the  use 
of  articulate  speech,  and  this  other  constitutes  the 
auditory  system;  but  their  activities  are  of  no  avail 
unless  the  Ego,  or  one  of  its  trained  representatives 
in  a  subordinate  nerve-centre,  elaborates  the  infor- 
mation received  and  gives  effect  to  it  through  other 
sets  of  carefully  educated,  executive  workers. 

The  higher  we  rise  in  the  scale  of  being  the  more 
prominently  does  the  non-mechanical  aspect  of  this 
relationship  appear,  and  the  more  clearly  is  the  func- 
tion of  the  Ego  seen  to  be  that  of  a  far-seeing  arid  over- 
ruling wisdom. 


336  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

In  the  lower  organisms,  the  quickness  and  uniformity 
of  the  responses  to  external  influences,  may  suggest 
mechanism;  but  the  more  the  Ego  becomes  developed 
the  more  critically  does  it  consider  the  reports  and 
petitions  that  are  sent  up  by  its  subjects;  and  the  more 
competent  does  it  become  to  correct,  to  refuse,  to 
modify,  to  reconstruct,  and  even  to  revolutionize. 
It  becomes  too  wise  to  satisfy  every  appetite  that 
importunes,  according  to  the  measure  of  its  demands. 
The  word  discipline  calls  up  to  the  memory  of 
every  moral  man  numberless  occasions  on  which  he 
has  played  the  part  of  an  inflexible  ruler  and  governor. 
He  has  been  hard  pressed  by  the  opposing  claims  of 
diverse  interests  in  his  little  world;  and  he  has  found 
his  wisdom  sorely  puzzled  to  adjust  these,  to  give  a 
reasonable  satisfaction  in  many  directions,  so  that 
there  shall  be  no  cause  for  desolating  rebellions  among 
his  subjects. 

Another  side  of  the  matter  illustrated  by  our  anal- 
ogy is  that  of  the  worth  of  the  subordinate  individual. 
Cells,  it  is  true,  are  continually  perishing  and  their 
places  are  taken  by  others.  They  succeed  each  other 
as  the  generations  of  men  succeed  each  other  in  the 
social  organism.  But,  while  it  lives,  every  living  cell 
has  functions  to  perform,  the  significance  of  which 
cannot  be  isolated  from  the  significance  of  the  whole. 
The  faithful  performance  of  its  part  contributes  some- 
thing to  the  vitality  of  other  members  of  the  organism 
and,  at  the  same  time  to  the  happiness  and  efficiency 
of  the  Ego.  In  this  dual  relationship,  we  have  a  unique 
symbol  for  illustrating  the  meaning  of  the  dual  state- 
ment of  the  great  law  of  religion  and  morality:  "Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy 
neighbour  as  thyself.'7 


APPENDIX  A  337 

Duty  to  one's  neighbour  is  not  something  separate 
from,  and  superadded  to,  duty  to  one's  God.  It  is,  in 
the  organic  unity  of  the  world,  only  a  different  aspect 
of  the  same  duty.  Devotion  to  the  Supreme  Being 
can  realize  itself  in  only  one  way,  —  faithfulness  to 
organic  relations.  The  immediate  concern  of  each 
individual  element,  or  being,  is  the  discharge  of  its 
special  functions  as  related  to  other  beings.  But  this 
is  made  sublime  and  inspiring  for  man  by  the  knowl- 
edge of  his  connection  with  the  Supreme  Ego. 

It  has  probably  occurred  to  the  reader  that,  in  the 
development  of  the  analogy  derived  from  the  physical 
organism,  we  have  also  availed  ourselves  of  the  closely 
related  one  of  the  social  organism;  and  it  may  seem 
that  there  is  something  forced  and  artificial  in  striving 
to  combine,  in  our  thought  of  the  Supreme  Being  and 
His  human  subjects,  ideas  acquired  in  departments 
of  experience  so  separate.  It  may  therefore  be  worth 
while  to  add  to  what  has  been  said  of  the  similarity 
and  continuity  of  these  departments,  the  considera- 
tion that  they  are  in  all  respects  homogeneous.  They 
differ  not  in  kind,  only  in  degree.  Every  impor- 
tant characteristic  of  the  one  is  represented  to  some 
extent  in  the  other.  In  the  social  organism,  as 
well  as  in  the  physical,  the  relations  which  we  study 
are  relations  between  organized  groups  of  nerve-cells. 

The  characteristic  that  specially  distinguishes  the 
relations  of  the  social  organism  is  that  of  externality. 
When  one  individual  has  relations  with  another 
he  seems  to  be  dealing  with  that  which  is  no  part  of 
himself,  but  a  separate  entity,  a  separate  focus  of 
interests.  A  natural  chasm  has  to  be  bridged  by 
some  means  of  communication.  Contrasted  with  this, 
action  within  the  physical  organism  seems  to  be  direct, 
22 


338  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

instantaneous,  and  accomplished  without  the  inter- 
vention of  means. 

But  if  we  penetrate  beneath  this  outside  appear- 
ance of  things,  we  shall  see  that  in  both  cases  there  is 
another  phase  of  the  reality  than  that  which  has 
preoccupied  the  imagination;  and  that  when  this  is 
taken  into  account,  the  two  sets  of  relations  declare 
themselves  to  be  not  essentially  different,  but  only 
different  in  the  degree  of  prominence  developed  in 
certain  elements.  We  shall  be  convinced  that  our 
thought  of  ourselves,  as  contained  within  the  little 
world  of  a  physical  organism,  is  a  false  suggestion  of 
the  imagination.  Our  existence  extends  as  far  as 
our  communications  extend.  The  head  of  the  body 
politic,  the  ideal  king  or  statesman,  whose  sight 
reaches  to  every  quarter  of  a  great  realm,  and  whose 
comprehensive  intelligence  understands  all  the  varied 
interests  that  balance  each  other  within  it,  is  a  vast 
being  compared  with  the  day-labourer  who  has  no 
thought  above  the  routine  of  his  occupation,  though 
he  may,  perchance,  have  a  larger  body  and  a  heavier 
brain. 

The  difference  consists  hi  this:  that  the  statesman 
has  brought  into  vital  connection  with  his  own  brain 
the  brains  of  a  multitude  of  diverse  individuals.  If 
we  allow  our  thoughts  to  be  captured  at  this  point 
by  a  contemplation  of  the  means  by  which  all  this  is 
brought  about,  we  shall  assuredly  rest  in  that  which 
is  secondary  and  incidental,  and  lose  sight  of  the 
essential  fact.  The  man  of  high  position  in  the  state 
has,  it  is  true,  extended  the  field  of  his  consciousness 
and  power  by  means  of  such  things  as  articulate  sounds, 
printed  books,  letters  hurried  by  steam  from  one  end 
of  the  realm  to  the  other,  and  by  the  use  of  electric 


APPENDIX  A  339 

wires  stretched  to  every  town  and  hamlet  like  the 
nerve-fibres  of  the  body. 

But  we  must  look  underneath  all  this  machinery 
to  find  the  essential  conditions  of  its  effectiveness: 
namely,  the  fact  that  the  brain  masses  belonging  to 
all  these  individuals  of  the  nation  are  homogeneous, 
and,  therefore,  capable  of  being  linked  together  so  as 
to  pour  all  their  knowledge  into  the  combining  con- 
sciousness of  any  individual  whose  capacity  is  equal 
to  its  reception.  From  this  point  of  view,  therefore, 
the  externality  of  the  relations  between  individuals 
has  to  give  place  to  another  phase  of  the  truth  that 
is  equally  real  and  more  vital. 

And  furthermore,  when  we  examine  the  phenomena 
that  characterize  the  interaction  of  the  elements 
within  the  physical  organism,  the  impression  of  immedi- 
ateness  and  absence  of  means  vanishes.  There  is 
no  internal  communication  that  does  not  require 
time  for  its  transmission;  and  all  the  intercourse  that 
takes  place  between  individual  elements  within  the 
organism  is  as  dependent  upon  means  as  that  which 
takes  place  outside  of  it.  Much  attention  has,  of 
late  years,  been  given  to  the  accurate  measurement 
of  the  intervals  that  elapse  between  the  reception  of 
stimuli  by  different  exterior  organs  and  their  percep- 
tion at  headquarters.  In  short,  scientific  research 
tends  continually  to  the  abolition  of  those  special 
marks  by  which  we  have  discriminated  between  the 
intercourse  of  beings  within  and  without  the  organism. 

We  may  then  cherish  a  dual  thought  of  God  without 
contradiction.  We  may  think  of  Him  as  our  Sover- 
eign. We  may  picture  to  ourselves  this  vast  universe 
as  a  network  of  means  for  conveying  the  knowledge 
of  itself  to  the  Being  who  dwells  apart,  separate 


340  GOD  IN  EVOLUTION 

in  His  individuality,  yet  so  connected  with  each 
one  of  His  creatures  that  nothing  is  indifferent 
to  Him.  On  the  other  hand,  when  we  think  of 
our  relations  to  the  great  sum  of  things,  so  connected 
in  every  part  as  to  form  an  organic  unity,  and  of  the 
one  life  and  order  that  flows  through  all,  we  have  to 
put  the  thought  of  separateness  far  into  the  back- 
ground, concentrating  our  attention  on  the  one  organic 
Being. 

Each  of  these  views  in  its  own  place  is  best.  No 
greater  mistake  can  be  made  than  to  array  them  against 
each  other.  God  dwells  within  His  world,  the  very  life 
and  breath  of  all  things.  He  is  the  great  heart  and 
brain  of  the  universe.  He  is  the  Ego,  for  Whom 
and  by  Whom  all  things  exist.  Every  plant  and  flower 
and  every  animated  form  is  an  expression  of  some 
thought  of  His.  Every  event  that  takes  place  in  His 
world  is  an  incident  in  His  life. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  God  is  also  transcendent. 
He  is  the  Supreme  Being  of  a  vast  hierarchy  of  beings. 
He  is  distinct  from  all  the  others,  and  above  them 
all.  They  are  His  ministers  that  do  His  pleasure.  He 
is  their  Sovereign,  they  are  His  subjects.  He  is  their 
Father,  they  are  His  children.  He  is  their  Crea- 
tor, they  are  His  instruments.  He  directs  and  over- 
rules their  activities  for  the  attainment  of  ends  that 
dwell  in  His  thought  as  ideals. 


APPENDIX   B 


Henri  Bergson 

WHEN  a  scheme  of  thought  comes  into  the 
world  that  compels  the  attention  and 
admiration  of  many  thinkers  of  divergent 
ways  of  looking  at  things,  it  is  a  phenom- 
enon worthy  of  our  study.  This  is  the  significant  fact 
with  regard  to  the  philosophy  of  Professor  Henri  Berg- 
son.*  He  is  attracting  to  himself  men  of  the  most 
widely  different  outlooks,  temperaments,  and  doctrines, 
each  one  of  whom  finds  in  him  the  endorsement  of  some- 
thing that  is  peculiarly  dear  to  him.  Seeing  that  his 
method  is  from  first  to  last  thoroughly  pragmatic,  that 
he  goes  direct  to  nature  for  his  facts  and  gives  the 
impression  of  great  single-mindedness  in  his  inter- 
pretation of  them,  it  is  no  wonder  that  he  is  received 
with  enthusiasm  and  acclaim  by  those  who  class  them- 
selves as  pragmatists.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  those 
of  the  opposite  camp,  the  absolutists  of  various  shades, 
would  lock  arms  and  claim  him  as  their  own.f 

*  No  citations  of  Bergson  have  been  made  in  the  foregoing 
pages,  for  the  simple  reason  that  the  author  had  not  read  any 
of  the  works  of  that  distinguished  writer  till  after  his  own  book 
(with  the  exception  of  Chapter  I  and  the  Appendices)  was 
completed. 

f  See  Review  by  J.  H.  Muirhead,  Hibbert  Journal,  April, 
1911,  p.  895. 

341 


342  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

We  can  hardly  explain  this  condition  of  things 
by  qualities  of  attractiveness  in  style  and  form, 
though  Bergson  has  these  qualities  in  a  remarkable 
degree.  In  the  words  of  Professor  James,  "The 
rarity  is  when  great  peculiarity  of  vision  is  allied 
with  great  lucidity  and  unusual  command  of  all  the 
classic  expository  apparatus.  Bergson's  resources  in 
the  way  of  erudition  are  remarkable,  and  in  the 
way  of  expression  they  are  simply  phenomenal. 
This  is  why  in  France,  where  I'art  de  bien  dire 
counts  for  so  much  and  is  so  sure  of  appreciation, 
he  has  immediately  taken  so  eminent  a  place  in  pub- 
lic esteem."  * 

The  very  possession  of  these  qualities,  again,  forbids 
us  to  attribute  the  consensus  of  approval  to  vagueness 
or  indeterminateness  in  the  presentation  of  his  views. 
He  asks  us,  it  is  true,  to  follow  him  sometimes  into 
nebulous  reaches  of  thought  where  intellectual  breath- 
ing is  difficult.  James  avers  that  many  of  his  ideas 
baffle  him  entirely.  But  it  is  not  in  these  alone,  but 
also  in  the  open  fields  of  constructive  philosophizing 
that  the  stamp  of  approval  is  set  and  the  claim  of 
fellowship  made.  We  must,  then,  go  deeper  down  to 
find  the  secret;  and  I  believe  it  to  be  condensed  in 
that  well-worn  formula:  "One  touch  of  nature  makes 
the  world  akin."  A  distinctive  thing  about  Bergson 
is  that  he  brings  his  great  store  of  resources  and 
gifts  to  bear  without  hindrance  from  disabling  pre- 
possessions. He  is  thoroughly  emancipated  from  the 
spell  which  Darwinism  and  the  mechanical  view  of 
the  universe  have  exercised  over  so  many  minds,  some 
of  them  of  a  high  order. 

He  goes  to  nature  open-eyed,  not  labouring  under  the 
*  "A  Pluralistic  Universe,"  p.  226. 


APPENDIX  B  343 

necessity  of  making  what  he  finds  there  tally  with 
the  theory  of  " Natural  Selection"  or  with  that  of  the 
creation  of  new  forms  by  the  very  unoriginating 
principle  of  heredity.  On  the  contrary,  his  philosophy 
is  a  frank  return  to  seeing  the  world  as  the  unscientific 
see  it.  It  restores  the  psychological,  spiritual  aspect 
of  it,  which  the  speculative  science  of  the  last  century 
did  so  much  to  banish.  It  removes  the  opacity  and 
dullness  that  prevailed  under  this  regime,  and  permits 
us  to  think  the  world  with  the  fresh  thoughts  of 
children.  There  is  a  buoyancy  and  a  tonic  in  this 
philosophy  that  is  specially  acceptable  in  an  age  of 
pessimistic  exhalations.  It  restores  vitality  to  that 
which  was  becoming  anemic,  hope  and  expectancy  to 
a  world  whose  outlooks  seemed  to  be  fast  closing  up. 

Bergson  does  not  enter  the  domain  of  theology,  or 
postulate,  as  we  do,  an  all-pervading  intelligence  at 
the  heart  of  things,  but  he  points  persistently  in 
this  direction  and,  by  his  implications,  pushes  us 
toward  some  such  hypothesis.  His  attitude  toward 
a  solely  mechanical  interpretation  of  the  universe  is 
explicit.  This  is,  he  tells  us,  the  outcome  of  a 
habit  into  which  the  intellect  has  been  betrayed 
by  the  instrumental  use  of  material  things.  It,  the 
intellect,  unconsciously  forms  for  itself  a  frame- 
work of  knowledge  into  which  all  its  experiences 
fit,  except  those  which  touch  life.  It  is  "at  home 
in  the  presence  of  unorganized  matter.  This  mat- 
ter it  makes  use  of  more  and  more  by  mechan- 
ical inventions;  and  mechanical  inventions  become 
the  easier  to  it  the  more  it  thinks  matter  as 
mechanism.  The  intellect  bears  within  itself,  in  the 
form  of  natural  logic,  a  latent  geometrism  that 
is  set  free  in  the  measure  and  proportion  that  the 


344  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

intellect  penetrates  into  the  inner  nature  of  inert 
matter."  * 

So  long,  therefore,  as  it  deals  only  with  the  inanimate, 
all  the  facts  fit  into  the  frame-work  perfectly.  But 
immediately  it  claims  universality  for  this  mould  of 
thought,  it  gets  into  difficulties;  for  life  is  incapable 
of  being  forced  into  it  otherwise  than  by  a  convention 
which  eliminates  from  it  all  that  is  essential.  To 
correct  this  aberration,  he  begins  by  tracing  a  defin- 
itive line  between  the  inert  and  the  living,  which 
leaves  us  free  to  adopt  a  special  attitude  toward  the 
latter  and  to  examine  it  with  other  eyes  than  those  ot 
positive  science.  Life  or  creative  force  is,  he  holds, 
the  antithesis  of  mechanism  and  matter;  and  the  facts 
of  evolution,  far  from  necessitating  or  inviting  a 
mechanical  interpretation,  are  the  contradiction  of  it. 
He  asks,  "Can  the  insufficiency  of  mechanism  be 
proved  by  facts?"  and  answers,  "If  this  demonstra- 
tion is  possible,  it  is  on  condition  of  frankly  accepting 
the  evolutionist  hypothesis."  t 

The  dualism,  thus  postulated  at  the  outset  of  the 
discussion,  persists  through  the  whole  course  of  the 
argument.  In  the  universe,  to  use  his  own  words,  "two 
opposite  movements  are  to  be  distinguished,  descent 
and  ascent.  The  first  only  unwinds  a  roll  already  pre- 
pared. In  principle  it  might  be  accomplished  almost 
instantaneously,  like  releasing  a  spring.  But  the  ascend- 
ing movement,  which  corresponds  to  an  inner  working 
of  ripening  or  creating,  endures  essentially  and  imposes 
its  rhythm  on  the  first,  which  is  inseparable  from  it."  J 

*  "Creative   Evolution,"    by    Henri    Bergson,    Member   of 
the  Institute,  Professor  at  the  College  de  France.    Translated 
by  Arthur  Mitchell,  Ph.D.,  p.  195. 
.,  p.  53. 


APPENDIX   B  345 

These  movements,  which  correspond  to  the  two  most 
general  laws  of  our  science,  the  principle  of  the 
degradation  of  energy  and  that  of  its  conservation,  are 
antagonistic  to  each  other.  On  the  one  hand,  we  see 
the  world  running  down,  unmaking  itself,  descending 
all  the  time  into  stereotyped,  material  forms;  and,  on 
the  other,  a  counter  movement  of  ascent  through  a 
creative  impulse  which,  great  as  it  is,  has  yet  a  ten- 
dency to  exhaust  itself.  "All  our  analogies  show  us 
in  life  an  effort  to  remount  the  incline  that  matter 
descends;  in  that  they  reveal  to  us  the  possibility, 
the  necessity  even,  of  a  process,  the  inverse  of 
materiality,  creative  of  matter  by  its  interruption 
alone."*  This  fundamental  discrimination  sends  a 
clarifying  current  through  the  vexed  questions  that 
confront  us  everywhere  in  connection  with  life's  varied 
antagonisms.  The  struggle  for  existence,  the  conflict 
between  its  varied  forms,  the  retrograde  movement 
that  sets  in  immediately  upon  the  cessation  of  effort,  the 
phenomena  of  old  age  and  decay,  the  difficulty  and 
labour  involved  in  the  improvement  of  human  con- 
ditions, the  painfully  slow  increase  of  intelligence, 
the  decay  of  instinct,  and  the  late  emergence  of  moral 
discriminations  —  all  these  and  a  multitude  of  similar 
situations  find  in  this  dual  movement  a  satisfactory 
classification. 

They  are  not,  thereby,  teleologically  explained,  but 
they  are  securely  lodged  in  the  first  indispensable  stage 
of  explanation.  By  referring  them  to  the  two  great 
tendencies  of  nature  above  mentioned,  these  facts  are 
ranged  as  necessary  and  homogeneous  parts  of  the 
great  universal  scheme  of  things  in  which  we  find  our- 
selves. The  "tremendous  internal  push"  that  is  the 
*  Ibid.,  p.  245. 


346  GOD    IN    EVOLUTION 

cause  of  vital  evolution  is,  according  toBergson,  the  out- 
come of  a  need  of  creation.  "It  cannot  create  abso- 
lutely because  it  is  confronted  with  matter,  that  is  to 
say,  with  the  movement  that  is  the  inverse  of  its  own. 
But  it  seizes  upon  matter,  which  is  necessity  itself  and 
strives  to  introduce  into  it  the  largest  possible  amount 
of  indetermination  and  liberty."*  But,  as  it  is  a 
limited  force  seeking  to  transcend  itself,  it  always 
remains  inadequate  to  its  work.  From  the  bottom  to 
the  top  of  the  organized  world  we  observe  one  great 
effort,  but  everywhere  there  is  manifest  a  dispropor- 
tion between  it  and  the  result. 

As  to  the  use  of  the  word  impetus  for  the  designation 
of  the  life  principle,  Bergson  recognizes  its  insufficiency 
and  its  misleading  implications.  He  says,  "It  must  be 
compared  to  an  impetus  because  no  image  borrowed 
from  the  physical  world  can  give  more  nearly  the  idea 
of  it.  But  it  is  only  an  image.  In  reality  life  is  of 
the  psychological  order."  f  It  is  only  in  its  contact 
with  matter  that  it  is  comparable  to  an  impulsion  or 
an  impetus,  "regarded  in  itself,  it  is  an  immensity  of 
potentiality." 

Throughout  the  discussion,  this  view  of  the  nature  of 
the  vital  principle  is  honoured.  The  concept  impetus 
is  largely  replaced  by  that  of  effort  and  always  with 
the  suggestion  of  conscious,  intelligent  effort.  "It 
is  the  role  of  life,"  he  tells  us,  "to  insert  some  inde- 
termination into  matter."  To  this  end  it  "seizes 
upon  matter."  Its  "main  energy  has  been  spent  in 
creating  apparatus."  It  "is  always  seeking  to  tran- 
scend itself."  It  "hesitates."  "It  finds  only  one  way 
of  succeeding."  In  short,  it  is  only  through  the  use  of 
terms  implying  intelligence  and  will  that  he  makes 
*  Ibid.,  p.  251.  f  Ibid.,  p.  257. 


APPENDIX   B  347 

the  process  intelligible  to  us.  Every  relapse  to  the 
mechanical  thought  acts  as  a  shutter  to  the  under- 
standing. 

Again,  the  necessity  for  postulating  an  indwelling 
intelligence  is,  it  seems  to  me,  latent  in  Bergson's 
account  of  instinct  and  intelligence.  These  two,  he 
holds,  are  not  things  of  the  same  order.  They  are  at 
once  mutually  complementary  and  mutually  antag- 
onistic. The  following  paragraph  is  italicized  by  our 
author:  "The  cardinal  error  which,  from  Aristotle 
onward,  has  vitiated  most  of  the  philosophies  of 
nature  is  to  see  in  vegetative,  instinctive,  and  rational 
life,  three  successive  degrees  of  the  development  of  one 
and  the  same  tendency,  whereas  they  are  three  diver- 
gent directions  of  an  activity  that  has  split  up  as  it 
grew."  *  Accepting  this,  what  shall  we  say  is  the  nature 
of  the  original  "activity"?  and  what  has  caused  it 
to  split  up  into  two  kinds,  antagonistic  and  comple- 
mentary to  each  other?  In  the  beginning  they  were 
one  psychic  activity,  and  because  they  were  originally 
interpenetrating  they  retain  always  something  of 
their  common  origin.  "There  is  no  intelligence  in 
which  some  traces  of  instinct  are  not  to  be  discovered, 
more  especially  no  instinct  that  is  not  surrounded  by 
a  fringe  of  intelligence."  f  This  accounts  for  the  fact 
that  they  have  been  generally  regarded  as  of  the  same 
kind,  while  "in  reality  they  accompany  each  other 
only  because  they  are  complementary." 

The  point,  I  take  it,  is  that  they  are  the  same  from 
one  point  of  view,  that  of  their  essential  nature;  but 
distinctly  different  from  another  point  of  view,  that  of 
their  functioning.  They  both,  we  are  told,  involve 
knowledge — "in  the  case  of  instinct,  unconscious,  in 
*  P.  185.  t  Ibid.,  p.  136. 


348  GOD   IN  EVOLUTION 

the  case  of  intelligence,  conscious."*  Though  so 
different,  however,  they  are  both  innate.  Instinct  is 
the  knowledge  of  things,  concrete  situations;  intelli- 
gence is  the  knowledge  of  relations.  "If  instinct  is, 
above  all,  the  faculty  of  using  an  organized  natural  in- 
strument, it  must  involve  innate  knowledge  (potential, 
or  unconscious,  it  is  true),  both  of  this  instrument  and 
of  the  object  to  which  it  is  applied.  Instinct  is,  there- 
fore, innate  knowledge  of  a  thing.  But  intelligence  is 
the  faculty  of  constructing  unorganized  (that  is  to 
say  artificial),  instruments.  .  .  .  The  essential  func- 
tion of  intelligence  is,  therefore,  to  see  the  way  out  of 
a  difficulty  in  any  circumstances  whatever,  to  find 
what  is  most  suitable,  what  answers  best  the  question 
asked."  f 

An  intelligent  being,  therefore,  bears  within  himself 
the  means  to  transcend  his  own  nature;  not,  however, 
in  virtue  of  his  intelligence,  but  because  this  is  supple- 
mented by  instinct.  "There  are  things  that  intelli- 
gence alone  is  able  to  seek,  but  which,  by  itself,  it  will 
never  find.  These  things  instinct  alone  could  find; 
but  it  will  never  seek  them."t  I  think  it  will  be 
generally  conceded  that  this  account  describes  truth- 
fully the  salient  characteristics  of  instinct  and  intelli- 
gence, and  that  the  claim  that  they  are,  as  related  to 
the  activities  of  the  individual,  different  in  kind,  is  well 
grounded  in  experience. 

As  we  look  on  this  side  and  on  that,  each  antithetical 
statement  commends  itself  as  true;  but  we  get  no 
intelligible  idea  of  how  they  are  combined  in  operation, 
or  how  their  difference  has  originated;  nor  can  we, 
unless  we  should  find,  somewhere  among  our  concrete 
experiences,  a  combination  of  diverse  and  yet  similar 
*  Ibid.,  p.  145.  f  Ibid.,  p.  150.  %  Ibid.,  p.  161. 


APPENDIX   B  349 

influences  functioning  in  somewhat  the  same  way, 
and  thus  reach  a  serviceable  understanding  of  their 
relations.  Such  a  concrete  experience  is,  it  seems  to 
me,  afforded  us  in  the  duality  of  the  motives  by 
which  our  daily  lives  are  regulated.  We  may  divide 
these  motives  into  two  distinct  classes:  first,  those 
which  have  been  self-elaborated,  gradually  reached 
through  reason  and  experience;  and,  second,  those 
which  have  had  their  rise  quite  independently  of  any 
intellectual  processes  of  ours. 

In  other  words,  everything  adduced  by  Professor 
Bergson  to  explain  the  difference  between  intelligence 
and  instinct  applies  perfectly  to  the  difference  between 
the  knowledge  which  a  man  works  out  for  himself  and 
that  which  has  been  worked  out  for  him  by  some  other 
man.  Intelligence,  then,  is  one's  own  intelligence. 
Instinct  is  the  intelligence  of  another,  appearing  in 
experience  as  an  impulsion  to  perform  certain  definite 
acts,  the  reasons  for  which  are  known  only  to  a  more 
comprehensive  wisdom.  Thus  we  are  again  urged  in  the 
direction  of  the  hypothesis  of  a  higher  intelligence  with 
which  we  are  intimately  and  organically  connected. 

As  regards  teleology,  Bergson  holds  a  middle  course. 
After  demonstrating  the  insufficiency  of  the  mechanical 
explanation,  he  turns  to  the  consideration  of  purpose 
or  finalism;  and  his  first  word  with  regard  to  it  is  that 
"radical  finalism"  is  quite  as  unacceptable  as  radical 
mechanism,  and  for  the  same  reason.  "The  doctrine 
of  teleology  in  its  extreme  form,  as  we  find  it  in  Leibniz, 
for  example,  implies  that  things  and  beings  merely 
realize  a  programme  previously  arranged.  There  is 
nothing  unforeseen,  no  invention  or  creation  in  the 
universe.  As  in  the  mechanical  hypothesis,  here  again 
it  is  supposed  that  all  is  given.  Finalism,  thus  under- 


350  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

stood,  is  only  inverted  mechanism."*  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  "finalism  is  not,  like  mechanism,  a  doc- 
trine with  fixed,  rigid  outlines.  It  admits  of  as  many 
inflexions  as  we  like.  The  mechanistic  philosophy  is 
to  be  taken,  or  left:  it  must  be  left  if  the  least  grain 
of  dust,  by  straying  from  the  path  foreseen  by  me- 
chanics, should  show  the  slightest  trace  of  spontaneity. 
The  doctrine  of  final  causes,  on  the  contrary,  will  never 
be  definitely  refuted.  If  one  form  of  it  be  put  aside, 
it  will  take  another.  Its  principle,  which  is  essentially 
psychological,  is  very  flexible.  It  is  so  extensible,  and 
thereby  so  comprehensive,  that  one  accepts  something 
of  it  as  soon  as  one  rejects  pure  mechanism.  The 
theory  we  shall  put  forward  in  this  book  will  therefore 
necessarily  partake  of  finalism  to  a  certain  extent."  f 
As  matter  of  fact,  Bergson  makes  a  very  generous 
use  of  teleology;  for  while  he  most  carefully  abstains 
from  postulating  any  definiteness  of  plan  in  nature,  and 
duly  emphasizes  the  fact  that  the  study  of  the  process, 
in  detail,  is  continually  leading  us  into  the  wilderness 
he  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  there  are  two  or  three 
highways,  and  that  by  following  these  as  closely  as 
possible  we  shall  be  sure  of  not  going  astray;  and  fur- 
thermore, that  what  concerns  us  particularly  is  the  road 
that  leads  to  man.  Man  is  unique.  He  alone  has 
broken  through  the  barrier  that  holds  the  rest  of 
creation  in  abeyance.  In  a  special  sense,  man  is  the 
term  and  the  end  of  evolution.  Not  that  he  is  the 
sole  end,  or  the  end  in  any  such  sense  that  it  can  be 
said  that  all  the  rest  of  nature  is  for  the  sake  of  man. 
He  has  struggled  like  the  other  species,  he  has  struggled 
against  other  species.  "  Evolution  has  been  accom- 
plished on  several  divergent  lines;  and  while  the 
*  Ibid.,  p.  84.  t  IWd.t  p.  40. 


APPENDIX   B  351 

human  species  is  at  the  end  of  one  of  them,  other 
lines  have  been  followed  with  other  species  at  their 
end."* 

In  his  struggle  upward,  man  has  suffered  losses. 
He  has  not  only  abandoned  cumbersome  baggage 
on  the  way;  he  has  also  had  to  give  up  valuable 
goods.  As  regards  some  kinds  of  instinct,  he  is 
manifestly  inferior  to  animals  lower  in  the  scale. 
"It  is  as  if  a  vague  and  formless  being,  whom  we 
may  call,  as  we  will,  man  or  superman,  had  sought 
to  realize  himself  and  had  succeeded  only  by  aban- 
doning a  part  of  himself  on  the  way.  The  losses 
are  represented  by  the  rest  of  the  animal  world  and 
even  by  the  vegetable  world.  .  .  .  From  this  point 
of  view  the  discordances,  of  which  nature  offers  us  the 
spectacle,  are  singularly  weakened.  The  organized 
world,  as  a  whole,  becomes  as  the  soil  on  which  was 
to  grow  either  man  himself  or  a  being  who  morally 
must  resemble  him.  The  animals,  however  distant  they 
may  be  from  our  species,  however  hostile  to  it,  have 
none  the  less  been  useful  travelling  companions,  on 
whom  consciousness  has  unloaded  whatever  encum- 
brances it  was  dragging  along,  and  who  have  enabled 
it  to  rise,  in  man,  to  heights  from  which  it  sees  an 
unlimited  horizon  open  before  it."  f 

Bergson,  furthermore,  gives  side  glances  at  certain 
pregnant  outcomes  of  evolution  that,  focalized,  are 
capable  of  conducting  us  to  a  much  more  definite 
teleology  than  that  for  which  he  makes  himself  respon- 
sible. There  are  certain  results  of  the  process  which,  in 
the  body  of  this  book,  we  have  called  its  indirect  incre- 
ment, its  by-products.  They  are,  as  related  to  man's 
purposes  and  efforts,  unexpected  side  issues;  but,  as 
*  Ibid.,  p.  S66.  Ibid.,  p.  266. 


352  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

related  to  the  highest  results  of  evolution,  they  are 
the  matters  that,  above  all  others,  have  significance 
and  persistent  value.  Bergson,  now  and  again,  while 
emphasizing  the  fact  that  intelligently-made  mechan- 
ism has  contributed  to,  and  greatly  modified,  human 
evolution,  recognizes,  as  it  were  with  bated  breath,  the 
importance  of  these  indirect,  unintended  promoters 
of  it. 

"A  noteworthy  fact  is  the  extraordinary  dispropor- 
tion between  the  consequences  of  an  invention  and  the 
invention  itself.  We  have  said  that  invention  is 
modelled  on  matter  and  that  it  aims,  in  the  first  place, 
at  fabrication.  But  does  it  fabricate  in  order  to 
fabricate,  or  does  it  not  pursue  involuntarily,  and  even 
unconsciously,  something  entirely  different?  Fabri- 
cating consists  in  shaping  matter,  in  making  it  supple 
and  in  bending  it,  in  converting  it  into  an  instrument 
in  order  to  become  master  of  it.  It  is  this  mastery  that 
profits  humanity  much  more  even  than  the  material 
result  of  the  invention  itself.  Though  we  desire  an 
immediate  advantage  from  the  thing  made,  as  an 
intelligent  animal  might  do,  and  though  this  advantage 
be  all  the  inventor  sought,  it  is  a  slight  matter  com- 
pared with  the  new  ideas  and  new  feelings  that  the  new 
invention  may  give  rise  to  in  every  direction,  as  if  the 
essential  part  of  the  effect  was  to  raise  us  above  our- 
selves and  enlarge  our  horizon.  Between  the  effect 
and  the  cause  the  disproportion  is  so  great  that  it  is 
difficult  to  regard  the  cause  as  producer  of  its  effect."* 

If  the  principle  here  illustrated  manifested  itself  in 

no  other  way  than  in  that  above  noticed,  wre  could  put 

it  aside  with  an  interrogation;   it  is,  we  might  say,  an 

experience  awaiting  more  light  for  explanation.    But, 

*  Ibid.,  p.  182. 


APPENDIX   B  353 

far  from  being  isolated,  its  manifestation  is  as  broad 
as  life  and  as  varied  as  human  endeavour.  And  the 
mystery  of  it,  without  the  hypothesis  of  a  divinity  that 
shapes  our  ends,  is  equally  great  in  every  class  of  our 
experiences. 

All  our  real  growth,  our  actual  progress  in  the 
scale  of  being,  is  in  the  beginning  achieved  by  this  same 
method  of  indirection;  and  though  it  is  only  at  an 
advanced  stage  that  we  learn  to  pursue  life's  higher 
ends  consciously  and  directly,  yet  when  this  stage  is 
reached  and  we  recognize  character  as  the  supreme 
value  toward  which  evolution  moves,  then  it  is  that 
we  are  in  a  position  to  construct  a  working  teleology, 
looking  before  and  after.  Such  an  interpretation  of 
life's  meaning  will  still  lack  definiteness.  It  cannot 
be  outlined  with  mathematical  precision.  It  must  be 
always  growing  with  our  growing  ideals;  but  the 
direction  of  it,  and  the  nature  of  the  Supreme  Real- 
ity that  is  at  once  its  Source  and  its  End,  becomes 
increasingly  known  to  us.  Bergson,  in  another  con- 
nection, recognizes  the  possibility  of  thus  penetrating 
to  the  inwardness,  the  "  intention,"  of  life  by  the  use 
of  the  activity  which  he  calls  intuition.  "It  is  to  the 
very  inwardness  of  life  that  intuition  leads  us  —  by 
intuition  I  mean  instinct  that  has  become  disinter- 
ested, self-conscious,  capable  of  reflecting  upon  its 
object  and  enlarging  it  indefinitely."  * 

If  I  am  not  mistaken,  this  describes,  in  different 
language,  the  very  process  above  outlined.  In  all  our 
strivings  to  better  ourselves,  whether  by  creation  or 
by  acquisition,  the  immediate  object  of  our  ambition 
is  something  clearly  and  definitely  apprehended  by 
intelligence.  But  the  underlying  motive  that  urges  us 
*  Ibid.,  p.  176. 


354  GOD   IN   EVOLUTION 

on,  is  instinctive  —  the  instinct  that  craves  self-realiza- 
tion in  some  form.  And  some  degree  of  self-realization 
is,  as  we  have  seen,  the  only  result  of  the  striving  that 
is  of  persistent  value.  It  is  only  when,  subsequently, 
this  value  is  forced  upon  our  attention,  that  we 
begin  to  understand  the  true  meaning  and  intention 
of  life. 

The  importance  of  such  a  contribution  as  this  of 
Professor  Bergson  to  the  modern  science  of  theology 
cannot  be  indicated  in  a  slight  sketch  like  the  present 
one.  It  needs  careful  study  and  quiet  thought.  It  is 
a  deep  well  of  wisdom,  though  it  assumes  to  be  only 
the  beginning  of  a  philosophy. 

Its  reserves  enhance  its  value;  for  they  produce 
upon  us  the  impression  that  the  work  moves,  primarily, 
and  without  prejudice,  in  the  interests  of  science  and 
philosophy.  As  related  to  theology  it  is  the  supplier 
of  materials  ready  shaped  for  building,  and  of  instru- 
ments well  tempered  for  use.  Or,  we  might  say,  it  is 
a  competent  guide  through  the  territory  of  science  and 
philosophy  up  to  the  borders  of  theology,  where  we 
find  paths  continuous  with  those  which  we  have 
travelled  in  the  author's  company.  I  say  paths,  for 
there  are  many,  taking  their  departure  from  diverse 
points  and  converging  to  one  common  centre. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


'- 

SDee'-- 
HOV211955U1 


REC'D  LD 
SEP  2    859 


JUN    41963^2 


OCT 


REC'D  LD 

15  '64  -10  AM 


LD  21-100m-ll,'49(B7146sl6)476 


YC  30878 


